Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple and straightforward. It would ensure that oil and gas pipeline safety rules and pipeline spill prevention or mitigation rules are not considered ``major rules'' under this bill.

By design, the REINS Act would likely delay or stop virtually all future Federal rulemaking. We could spend hours listening to some of the countless health and safety problems that this bill would cause. I commend my colleagues for raising some of these issues in the other amendments that are being offered today and debated.

My amendment focuses on protecting oil and gas pipeline safety and spill mitigation rules from the needless and costly delays imposed by this bill. These rules are particularly important to me and to my constituents in the wake of the recent oil spill in my district.

On May 19, line 901 of the Plains All American pipeline ruptured just north of Santa Barbara, California; and it spewed over 100,000 gallons of crude oil onto Refugio State Beach and the surrounding areas. At least 20,000 gallons of the oil spilled into the Pacific Ocean and spread along nearly 100 miles of pristine California coastline, devastating local wildlife, covering our beaches in thick tar, and closing valuable fisheries.

One of the other tragedies of this spill is that it likely could have been prevented--or at least minimized--if the pipeline had been using state-of-the-art automatic shutoff and leak detection technologies.

These systems are available and are already in use in other pipelines in the area, but this pipeline does not have these technologies because its Federal regulator--the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, or PHMSA--currently does not require the use of these safety systems.

Like many communities across the country, the central coast of California, which I represent, has called for action. The good news is that Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has listened and has demanded action to improve pipeline safety rules.

In 2011, we came together and unanimously passed the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act, which required PHMSA to issue 42 new pipeline safety standards; yet, 4 years later, PHMSA has yet to complete 16 of these requirements, including the rules to strengthen standards on automatic shutoff and leak detection systems.

This unacceptable delay has not been lost on this Congress. Just 2 weeks ago, we held a bipartisan hearing in the Energy and Commerce Committee on the long overdue implementation of these pipeline safety standards.

Both Republicans and Democrats chided PHMSA for dragging its feet because we all agree that these rules are long overdue and must be completed as soon as possible. It is baffling now that, just 2 weeks after this bipartisan hearing, we find ourselves considering a bill that would delay these pipeline rules even further.

Let's be clear. That is exactly what the REINS Act would do. My amendment would protect these important safety standards from the added layers of bureaucracy that the REINS Act would impose.

I hope that my colleagues will join me again today, as they did 2 weeks ago, in working to ensure that PHMSA is not further delayed in fulfilling its obligations. They can do this by voting for this amendment, which would simply ensure oil and gas pipeline safety rules are not considered ``major rules'' under the REINS Act. It would not exempt these rules from the main reporting requirements, but it would minimize the additional delays created by the bill.

If this bill were to become law as written, PHMSA's pipeline safety rules would not take effect until both the House and the Senate affirmatively voted to approve them, but both the House and the Senate already voted unanimously in 2011 to require PHMSA to write these rules. Going around and around in circles makes no sense.

Mr. Chairman, supporters of this bill claim that the REINS Act is all about more efficient and effective government. How is it more efficient or effective to require Congress to reconsider and reapprove rules that it has already voted unanimously to establish?

The simple truth is that the REINS Act is not about efficient or effective government. It is a partisan gimmick that will do nothing but gum up the works and needlessly delay important health and safety rules that our constituents depend on.

My amendment won't make this a good bill--and I intend to oppose its final passage--but my amendment would at least help to ensure that the REINS Act does not delay oil and gas pipeline safety standards any more than they already have been. This is something which, I hope, we can all agree on; so I urge my colleagues to stop the delays and support my amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, as I stated earlier, this amendment is straightforward and common sense.

There is broad, bipartisan agreement that stronger oil and gas pipeline safety standards are long overdue. I hope there is similar agreement that further delaying these safety rules puts communities like mine in California and hundreds of communities across the country at risk.

My amendment would simply ensure that these safety rules are not subject to the needless, burdensome delays created by the REINS Act. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source