Pipeline safety laws have been long time coming

The Congress sent President Bush a comprehensive bill to make the nation's 2.2 mm miles of interstate oil and gas pipelines safer, more than two years after a pipeline exploded near Carlsbad, New Mexico, and killed 12 people of an extended family.
The pipeline safety measure's fate is sealed. President Bush is expected to sign it and finally give some level of comfort to those who have been affected directly by the issue. But even as its sponsors acknowledge, the bill is imperfect. It is a modest step forward that must be continually enhanced.
"For the first time in a decade, Congress has put people and environmental protections before the profit of pipeline companies," says Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., ranking member of the House Energy Committee. "This bill will help ensure that there are no more tragic losses of life due to negligent operators or hazardous pipelines. I am saddened, however, that this has been so long coming."

The legislation would speed up the frequency with which pipelines are inspected and impose tougher penalties than in the past. It's a move that critics say is positive but would have done nothing to prevent some of the recent catastrophic events related to pipeline accidents.
Efforts to reform the laws that govern the nation's 2.2 mm interstate oil and gas pipelines have languished in the halls of Congress. The issue moved to the forefront when in 1999 an explosion killed three people in Bellingham, Washington. A subsequent rupture killed 12 people in New Mexico.

An average of four pipeline accidents occur each week and cause death or injury, according to the US General Accounting Office. But, despite the risk, only one out of 25 pipeline violations receive penalties by inspectors. About 4.5 mm gallons leaked in 2002 and roughly 4.1 mm gallons escaped in 2001, says the Department of Transportation's Office of Pipeline Safety. That's down from an average annual leakage of 6.4 mm gallons in the 1990s.
The Office of Pipeline Safety had been on the Transportation Department's “Most wanted list,” meaning that it was poorly funded and improperly staffed -- all of which crippled it. In May, however, that status changed. It's now implemented a variety of recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board, which include the use of “best practices” when it comes to excavation and maintaining pipeline maps that are clear, accurate and current.

In April, the agency hit Columbia Gas Transmission with fines totalling $ 400,000 for violations discovered between June and September 2000. Much of the fine is tied to the lack of routine valve inspections that are required by law. In February 2001, regulators fined the company $ 198,000 for breaking five different pipeline safety rules. Most of those penalties imposed were the result of failing to perform internal corrosion checks at 13 locations between 1996 and 1999.
The bill would require “meaningful” pipeline inspections at least once in the next 10 years and every seven years after that, althoughsome infrastructure near big cities would receive more frequent attention. Because the Transportation Department has a “poor” history of compliance with Congressional directives, the language provides a “fail-safe” mechanism that places the obligation to inspect pipelines on pipeline operators if the department passes over its duties.

The legislation also has a provision that enables repairs to be made more efficiently as well as one that increases state involvement in the safety inspection process. The public's right-to-know about possible hazards would be expanded and employees of pipeline companies who report potential problems would be insulated from retribution. And, the bill allocates $ 6 mm to train people to handle pipeline accidents and earmarks $ 25 mm for research and development to new technologies. Finally, the measure increases the maximum penalty for a series of violations from $ 100,000 to $ 1 mm.
“I believe we have crafted fair legislation that should work to give the public more confidence in the safety of the pipelines that cross our state, particularly when these pipelines impede populated or sensitive areas,” says Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M. who will take over the chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in January. “This package should move the industry to be more responsible with timely inspections and repairs. At the same time, it will encourage more research into technologies that will alert us when pipelines are compromised.”

To be sure, many view the bill as half-hearted. Inspections and penalties should be tougher, some critics charge, noting that many pipelines have not been examined for years, if at all. The father of a 10-year-old boy killed in the explosion in Washington State says that inspections should start immediately. “On a scale of 1 to 10 on safety, (the bill) is a two,” says Frank King, whose son Wade died in the 1999 explosion. “This is not a victory for pipeline safety.”
And others are fearful that the Office of Pipeline Safety still has no bite. According to Jay Rubino, an electrical engineer licensed in Virginia who has coordinated job functions with the agency, the quality of inspections is lacking. Those inspectors simply write down what gas companies tell them, he maintains. On one occasion just recently the utility managed to get a clean bill of health when its high-pressure pipeline was only two feet underground, he says, which is still well below the three-foot requirement. When the engineering firm complained to the federal agency, it “did nothing.”
“The Office of Pipeline Safety is a sham,” says Rubino. “It then goes out looking like hero after an accident by issuing fines that are probably never paid.”

Energy companies say that federal regulations do not drive industry behaviour, noting that they have systems in place to detect leaks and wear and tear in the pipeline systems. Most companies adhere to schedules to inspect their own pipelines, they say, pointing out that the repercussions of any accident necessitate that they be vigilant.
The American Petroleum Institute points out that under the terms of the federal integrity-management rules now in effect, energy companies generally will increase their assessments of pipelines located near navigable waters and populated regions. Meanwhile, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America says that it will pursue pipeline safety rules that are “rational, cost-effective and flexible.” The aim is to minimize pipeline accidents, or ideally, to wipe them out altogether while at the same time working to build the country's energy infrastructure.

Pipeline companies have taken a more conciliatory approach. In previous years they insisted much of the proposed regulation was intrusive and that self-regulation would protect the public. As a result, prior attempts to put more teeth into laws failed. But the issue has reached a crescendo as the number of high-profile accidents has jumped and the consequences have become more severe.
All stakeholders have grown to realize that the matter could no longer be neglected. The new laws will give the public some added protections and probably lead to the development of better technologies to detect problems before they occur. Over time, however, the quality of inspections and the frequency with which they are performed must be augmented.