To amend title 49, United States Code, to modify requirements relating to the availability of pipeline safety regulatory documents, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

On January 3, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011. Section 24 of that act states that, effective January 3, 2013, the Secretary of Transportation may not issue ``guidance or a regulation that incorporates by reference any documents or portions thereof unless the documents or portions thereof are made available to the public free of charge or on an Internet Web site.''

Then, in the last Congress, the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials held a number of hearings on pipeline safety, one of which highlighted a current regulation that required pipeline operators to develop and implement public education and awareness programs. The regulation did not explain what should be contained in the education programs, however. Instead, it pointed readers to an industry-developed standard. But in order to read the standard, you had to pay the drafters more than $1,000. If you're a small community, $1,000 is a lot of money for access to just one of many pipeline safety standards.

I and many of my colleagues have concerns about the Federal Government issuing a regulation that requires whoever wants to read it--particularly local communities, first responders, and private citizens--to have to purchase it from a private association. Fortunately, the 2011 act resolved this situation.

Following enactment of section 24, DOT held a public workshop and Webcast with more than 70 industry, safety, and government representatives present to discuss options for implementing the new law. Nearly 200 other entities participated in the Webcast. Additional comments were provided through the Federal Register notice, including by the Small Business Administration, which noted many concerns of small businesses with the continued use of incorporation by reference.

Since the workshop, several standards development organizations have agreed in writing to electronically post on the Internet all of the consensus standards that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration incorporates by reference into the Federal pipeline safety regulations. Those include ASTM International, the Manufacturers Standardization Society, the Gas Technology Institute, NACE International, the National Fire Protection Association, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Gas Association. I will include their letters in the Congressional Record.

I also will insert letters from the Pipeline Safety Trust, Dakota Rural Action, and Columbia law professor Peter Strauss expressing the need for public availability of the standards in the Record.

Unfortunately, some organizations have expressed concerns about posting their standards on the Internet. This has in turn held up progress of several important safety rulemakings that were mandated in the 2011 pipeline law. So in the spirit of bipartisanship, and not wanting to hold up the rulemaking process, I believe the law should be modified to provide DOT with additional time to implement it and with additional flexibility to determine how best to make the standards widely available to the public. I believe that, even with these changes that are in the law, the law will continue to address the transparency and openness concerns of the safety community.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous

Materials Safety Administration,

Washington, DC, March 4, 2013.

Re incorporation by reference of voluntary consensus

standards for pipeline safety regulations.

Mr. James Thomas,

President, ASTM International,

West Conshocken, PA.

Dear Mr. Thomas: As you know, the practice of incorporating

voluntary consensus standards allows pipeline operators to

use the most current industry technologies, materials, and

management practices available on today's market. New or

updated standards often further innovation and increase the

use of new technologies that improve the safety and

operations of pipelines and pipeline facilities.

On January 3, 2012, President Obama signed into law the

Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act

of 2011 (P.L. 112-90) (the Act). Section 24 of the Act states

that, effective January 3, 2013, PHMSA may not issue

``guidance or a regulation that incorporates by reference any

documents or portions thereof unless the documents or

portions thereof are made available to the public, free of

charge, on an Internet Web site.''

In support of Section 24 of the Act, we thank ASTM

International (ASTM) for agreeing to electronically post on

the Internet all ASTM consensus standards that PHMSA

incorporates by reference into the

federal pipeline safety regulations after January 3, 2013. It

has also agreed to post on the Internet any updated, revised,

or new ASTM consensus standards that PHMSA proposes during

rulemaking to incorporate by reference. While ASTM has

discretion in how they accomplish this objective, it has

agreed that, at a minimum, these voluntary consensus

standards will be: Electronically posted on an Internet Web

site; Available to the public; and Free of charge.

ASTM has agreed to notify PHMSA immediately if it is no

longer able or capable of meeting the above minimum posting

requirements. We request that you also notify us if any

standards are removed from your electronic archives, if you

have such an archives. The voluntary consensus standards

developed by ASTM play a critical role in safeguarding

pipeline safety, and PHMSA is tremendously appreciative of

the constructive role ASTM is playing in ensuring their

continued use in the federal pipeline safety regulations.

After you review the terms of this agreement, please sign

below and return a copy to PHMSA. If you have questions,

please contact Mike Israni at 202-366-4571.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey D. Wiese,

Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2576) to amend title 49, United States Code, to modify requirements relating to the availability of pipeline safety regulatory documents, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 2576.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill before us, H.R. 2576. This bill is a correction of an unintended consequence of the bipartisan Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011. It is sponsored by Chairman Denham of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, along with full committee Chairman Shuster, Ranking Member Rahall, and subcommittee Ranking Member Brown.

Last Congress, section 24 of the Pipeline Safety Act included a good- faith provision intended to make the pipeline safety regulations and guidance of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials

Safety Administration, or PHMSA, more transparent. It did so by requiring any document or portion thereof incorporated by reference into the new regulations and guidance of PHMSA to be made available free of charge on the Internet. In so doing, however, an unintended consequence of this language was created that, contrary to the intent of Congress, has adversely impacted the ability of PHMSA to move forward with its regulatory agenda by placing practical barriers on PHMSA's ability to rely on the state-of-the-art technical standards written by standards developing organizations, referred to as SDOs. This bill simply corrects this unintended outcome and preserves the intellectual property rights of these organizations while still meeting the goals of a transparent government with free access to standards for noncommercial purposes.

Specifically, the bill allows for standards to be made free of charge but strikes ``on an Internet Web site,'' which allows PHMSA and SDOs more leeway to comply with the law. It also gives industry and PHMSA extra time to comply by making it effective 3 years from enactment instead of 1 year.

Finally, the bill limits the applicability of the provision to only pipeline safety organizations. I believe that this bipartisan technical correction will provide PHMSA with the flexibility needed to continue to fully leverage its partnership with standards developing organizations and save the government money by not requiring PHMSA to develop its own technical standards for rulemaking.

I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Energy and Commerce,

Washington, DC, July 11, 2013.

Hon. Bill Shuster,

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Shuster: I write concerning H.R. 2576, a bill

to amend title 49, United States Code, to modify requirements

relating to the availability of pipeline safety regulatory

documents, and for other purposes, which was ordered to be

reported out of your Committee on July 10, 2013. I wanted to

notify you that the Committee on Energy and Commerce will

forgo action on H.R. 2576 so that it may proceed

expeditiously to the House floor for consideration.

This is being done with the understanding that the

Committee on Energy and Commerce is not waiving any of its

jurisdiction, and the Committee will not in any way be

prejudiced with respect to the appointment of conferees or

its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar

legislation.

I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming

this understanding, and ask at a copy of our exchange of

letters on this matter be included in the Congressional

Record during consideration of H.R. 2576 on the House floor.

Sincerely,

Fred Upton,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, when I was Chair of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials, I held a number of hearings on pipeline safety, one of which highlighted an American Petroleum Institute-developed (API) standard which was incorporated by reference in a pipeline education and awareness regulation. But in order to comprehend the regulation, interested parties had to obtain the API standard, which cost more than $1,000. One thousand dollars is a lot of money, particularly for small communities, local emergency responders, and pipeline safety advocates, for just one of the many pipeline safety standards referenced in regulations issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).

Fortunately, Congress resolved the situation in the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011. Section 24 of the Act prohibited the Secretary of Transportation, effective January 3, 2013, from issuing ``guidance or a regulation that incorporates by reference any documents or portions thereof unless the documents or portions thereof are made available to the public, free of charge, on an Internet Web site.''

Since enactment of the legislation, all but one organization has agreed in writing to electronically post on the Internet all of their consensus standards that PHMSA incorporates by reference into the federal pipeline safety regulations, including:

ASTM International; The Manufacturers Standardization Society; The Gas Technology Institute; NACE International; The National Fire Protection Association; The American Petroleum Institute; The American Gas Association.

Many other organizations have submitted letters to PHMSA expressing the need for public availability of the standards. I ask unanimous consent that the letters from the Pipeline Safety Trust, Dakota Rural Action, and Columbia Law Professor Peter Strauss be included in today's Record.

One organization, however, has expressed concern about posting their standards on the Internet. This has, in turn, held up progress of several important safety rulemakings that were mandated in the 2011 pipeline law.

So in an effort to move these important rulemakings forward, I believe the law should be modified to provide DOT with additional time to implement it and with additional flexibility to determine how best to make the standards widely available to the public.

I believe that even with these changes the law will continue to address the transparency and openness concerns of the safety community.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2576.

Pipeline Safety Trust,

Bellingham, WA, July 15, 2013.

Hon. Corrine Brown,

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and

Hazardous Materials, U.S. House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Ms. Brown: We would like to thank the Transportation &

Infrastructure Committee and the Energy & Commerce Committee

for their efforts during the passage of the Pipeline Safety,

Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (the 2011

Act) to ensure that the public can actually freely read all

the regulations that Congress mandates and that PHMSA then

creates through the rulemaking process that could impact

public safety and the health of the environment. A review of

the Code of Federal Regulations under which PHMSA operates

finds the following numbers of incorporated standards:

Mr. Speaker, I missed the following votes during this week:

On rollcall vote 354, on the passage of H.R. 2576, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 355, on the passage of H.R. 1848, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 356, on the passage of H.R. 2611, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 357, ordering the Previous Question for H. Res. 300, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 358, on the passage of H. Res. 300, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 359, on the Motion to Adjourn, I voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 360, on the Motion to Recommit H.R. 2667, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 361, on passage of H.R. 2667, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 362, on the Motion to Recommit H.R. 2668, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 363, on passage of H.R. 2668, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 364, on ordering the Previous Question on H. Res. 303, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 365, on passage of H.Res. 303, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 366, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 367, I would have voted ``aye.''

On rollcall vote 368, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote 369, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably detained and missed the following vote: H.R. 2576--To amend title 49, United States Code, to modify requirements relating to the availability of pipeline safety regulatory documents, and for other purposes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill.