For more-leftward Democrats in the US House of Representatives, deliberation of pipeline-safety legislation might, over the next few months, cause discomfort. A common-sense proposal last month by the Department of Transportation will agitate constituencies to which they usually pander.
The DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration recommended a toughening of criminal liability under the Pipeline Safety Act for attacks on oil and gas pipelines. The PSA, which sets standards for pipelines, storage facilities, and LNG terminals, is due reauthorization by Sept. 30.
More than hooliganism
One of several recommendations in the PHMSA reauthorization proposal addresses interference of pipeline operations by protesters. Under current law, damaging or destroying interstate pipelines or related equipment can be prosecuted as crimes. The PHMSA proposal would expand the scope for criminal prosecution in two ways. It would make disrupting pipeline operations, such as through vandalism or tampering, a crime. And it would extend coverage of the law to attacks on interstate pipelines under construction.
In a press release expressing “strong support” for the proposal, the Association of Oil Pipe Lines explained the need. In October 2016, it said, activists attacked five crude oil pipelines simultaneously in four states along the US-Canada border. They entered valve stations after breaking chains and locks on perimeter fences and turned valves to shut flow. Together, the pipelines had delivery capacity of 2.8 million b/d of crude. One of the valve stations, in Washington State, was targeted for attack again in 2017. Activists similarly attacked a pipeline in northern Minnesota in 2019.
The behavior represents more than hooliganism against private property and mischievous disruption of oil supply. It’s dangerous. And it’s dangerous not only to the perpetrators but to surrounding communities and the environment as well. “Improper closure of pipeline valves can cause a pressure surge from the mass and momentum of the liquid traveling through the pipeline, potentially resulting in a rupture and release,” AOPL said. But the activity wasn’t criminal under current law because it didn’t damage or destroy the pipelines or valves. The group said “several more recent attacks” physically damaged pipelines under construction, again outside the scope of criminal behavior under the pipeline-safety law.
Trespass with the intent to interrupt pipeline operations clearly should represent criminal activity. No more appropriate mechanism exists for closing an obvious legal loophole than the statute dealing with pipeline safety.
Some House Democrats might want to duck the issue, though. Opponents of the production and use of hydrocarbon energy have made pipelines their dragons to slay in crusades to save Earth from climate change. Stunts against pipelines grab attention and help advocacy groups raise money. And with Democratic presidential aspirants competing for liberal validation in a crowded primary field, many in the party will be loath to seem resistant to any climate agenda, even those articulated with bolt cutters and acetylene torches.
SPA reauthorization thus will be a test. In the House, which is controlled by Democrats, the Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce committees will oversee legislation. And among Democrats on the key Senate committee, Commerce, Science, and Transportation, sits Edward Markey of Massachusetts, an early endorser of Green New Deal radicalism who won’t want to disappoint bolt cutters by supporting legislation criminalizing their pranks. But Markey is properly concerned about pipeline safety. Explosions of overpressured gas distribution lines in three Merrimack Valley towns on the Massachusetts-New Hampshire border last September killed a teenager, injured more than two dozen people, and damaged more than 100 buildings.
Improvement needed
Regulation of pipeline safety needs improvement. Accidents still happen. New technologies for accident prevention and response are available. And pipeline transportation must grow, raising chances for mishap, to accommodate surging production of oil and gas.
The test for lawmakers is one of seriousness. Will Markey and other liberals work to improve pipeline safety regulation in every way possible? Or will they make dangerous exceptions for the self-discrediting misbehavior of activists disconcerted by energy utopianism?