Pipeline Safety Authorization Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 21, 2026
Bottom line
The Pipeline Safety Authorization Act of 2026 reauthorizes federal pipeline safety funding, streamlines some regulatory processes, and introduces a new voluntary data-sharing system alongside strengthened state-level damage prevention efforts.
What it actually does
This bill reauthorizes federal pipeline safety programs for fiscal years 2027 through 2031, making several key amendments to Title 49, United States Code. It clarifies regulatory exemptions for certain gas gathering and in-plant piping systems, mandates explicit consideration of domestic economic benefits and costs in safety standard rulemaking, and enhances due process for pipeline operators in significant enforcement actions. Crucially, it establishes a new confidential voluntary information-sharing system for pipeline safety data and strengthens state-level excavation damage prevention programs by outlining leading practices and data reporting requirements.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill will significantly improve pipeline safety by fostering a more collaborative, data-driven approach to risk management, while also enhancing regulatory efficiency and predictability for operators. They contend that clarifying exemptions reduces unnecessary burdens, allowing PHMSA to focus resources on higher-risk areas. Furthermore, the bill's focus on excavation damage prevention and increased penalties will deter incidents and ensure robust federal oversight.
Opponents contend
Critics might express concerns that expanding regulatory exemptions, even for specific pipeline types, could create safety gaps or reduce transparency. While supporting data sharing, some may argue that the broad confidentiality protections for the new voluntary information-sharing system could shield critical safety information from public scrutiny or legitimate legal discovery, potentially hindering accountability in the event of an incident.
The bill is moderately complex due to its technical nature and amendments to existing law, requiring careful reading to understand the full implications.
Section 2
Clarification of Gas Gathering and In-Plant Piping Exemptions
This section amends the definition of 'gathering gas' and 'moving gas' in federal law to explicitly exclude certain rural gas gathering lines and specific in-plant or short transfer piping systems (less than one mile outside facility boundaries) used for production, refining, or manufacturing operations from federal pipeline safety regulations. This narrows the scope of federal oversight for these particular types of pipelines.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this clarifies existing ambiguities in regulations, reduces unnecessary burdens on specific types of pipelines that may pose lower risks or are already subject to other forms of oversight, and allows the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to focus its resources on higher-risk areas.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that expanding exemptions, even for specific types of pipelines, could create safety gaps, particularly if these lines are near populated areas or carry hazardous materials, potentially increasing environmental or public safety risks.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances reducing regulatory burden on industry against maintaining a comprehensive scope of federal safety oversight.
Section 3
Economic and Environmental Benefit/Cost Analysis for Safety Standards
This section amends existing law to require the Secretary of Transportation to explicitly consider 'safety and economic benefits within the United States' and 'costs within the United States' when establishing minimum safety standards for pipelines. It also mandates explicit consideration of 'safety, economic, and environmental benefits within the United States' for certain requirements.
Section 4
Formal Hearing Opportunity for High-Cost Compliance or Penalties
This section requires the Secretary of Transportation to provide an opportunity for a formal hearing, in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 554), for enforcement matters related to probable violations where the proposed compliance action cost exceeds $125,000 or the proposed civil penalty is $125,000 or more. It also mandates the Secretary publish protocols for these public hearings within one year of enactment.
Section 5
Streamlining Special Permit Process and Limiting Waiver Terms
This section adds new requirements to the special permit program. It limits the terms the Secretary can impose on a waiver, stating they cannot apply to known pipeline safety risks not applicable to the standard being waived. It also requires the Secretary to publish notice of special permit applications in the Federal Register and mandates completion of the application review within 18 months of publication. Additionally, it requires reports to Congress from the Secretary and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on the implementation of these changes.
Section 8
Establishment of a Voluntary Information-Sharing System (VIS)
This section establishes a confidential voluntary information-sharing system (VIS) to gather, evaluate, and share critical pipeline safety data, recommended remediation measures, and lessons learned across the pipeline industry. It creates a governing board with diverse stakeholders, a third-party data manager, and issue analysis teams. The system is designed to encourage voluntary sharing without being used for enforcement, and nonpublic information accepted into the VIS is explicitly kept confidential, exempt from FOIA, and generally excluded from discovery in litigation, with specific exceptions for deidentified information and criminal violations.
Section 9
State One-Call Program Leading Practices and Grant Criteria
This section amends the federal grants to states for excavation damage prevention programs. It requires states to adopt 'leading practices' for their one-call notification programs, including defining ticket scope and longevity, limiting exemptions, specifying tolerance zones, requiring positive response, and mandating training. It also adds new considerations for grant effectiveness, such as consistent enforcement and detailed data reporting for damages and near-misses to both local one-call centers and a nationally focused nonprofit organization.
Section 10
Increased Civil Penalties for Pipeline Safety Violations
This section increases the maximum civil penalty for pipeline safety violations from $200,000 to $341,200 per violation per day. It also raises the maximum aggregate penalty for a related series of violations from $2,000,000 to $3,412,000.
Expands the scope of criminal penalties for pipeline safety violations to include 'impairing the operation of' a pipeline facility and 'damaging or destroying such a facility under construction and intended to be operated as such a facility on completion of the construction.'
Section 6
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for refining the scope of existing criminal statutes, often done through precise legal language rather than broad, easily digestible statements.
Case for: Proponents argue this strengthens deterrence against malicious acts that could compromise pipeline safety, ensuring that actions impairing operations or targeting facilities under construction are adequately penalized, thereby protecting critical infrastructure.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against strengthening penalties for intentional damage or impairment of critical infrastructure, as these are generally seen as necessary deterrents to protect public safety and national security.
Estimated impact: Broadens the activities subject to criminal prosecution related to pipeline safety, increasing potential legal consequences for individuals or entities engaged in such acts, thereby enhancing the security of pipeline infrastructure.
Amends 49 U.S.C. 60301(d)(2) to specify that user fees collected for the Pipeline Safety Fund 'shall remain available in the Pipeline Safety Fund until expended and may be used'.
Section 11
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for modifying appropriations language to ensure efficient use of dedicated funds, often placed in technical sections of a bill.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures that dedicated user fees can be fully utilized for pipeline safety purposes, preventing the loss of funds due to administrative delays or multi-year projects, thereby enhancing PHMSA's operational efficiency and resource management.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against ensuring the full utilization of dedicated user fees for their intended purpose, as it is seen as a technical fix for budget management that improves government efficiency.
Estimated impact: Improves PHMSA's financial flexibility and resource management for pipeline safety programs, ensuring that collected fees are not forfeited at the end of a fiscal year and can be applied to ongoing or future safety initiatives.