In subsection (a)(1), the word “prepare” is omitted as surplus. The words “or offices” are omitted because of 1:1. The words “in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary or appropriate State agency” in 49 App.:1680(a) (1st sentence), “in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary or, where a certification or agreement pursuant to section 2004 of this Appendix is in effect, by the appropriate State agency” in 49 App.:2009(a) (1st sentence), and “by regulation” are omitted as surplus because of 49:322(a) and sections 60102–60105 of the revised title.

In subsection (a)(2), before clause (A), the words “the Secretary or” are added for clarity. The words “at any time” in 49 App.:1680(a) (3d sentence) are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (a)(3), the word “appropriate” is omitted as surplus.

In subsection (b)(1), before clause (A), the words “to ensure the safety of such pipeline facilities” and “factors” are omitted as surplus. In clause (G), the words “if any” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (b)(2), the text of 49 App.:1680(b)(1) (3d sentence) and 2009(d)(1) (3d sentence) is omitted as obsolete.

In subsection (c)(1)(B), the words “except with respect to the initial inspection required under paragraph (1)” are omitted as obsolete.

In subsection (c)(1)(C), the word “current” is omitted as surplus.

In subsection (c)(2)(B), before clause (i), the words “to carry out” are substituted for “under” because the Secretary does not prescribe regulations under 49 App.:1672(h)(3) or 2002(l)(3).

In subsection (c)(3), the text of 49 App.:1672(h)(1) and 2002(l)(1) is omitted as executed.

In subsection (c)(4)(A), the text of 49 App.:1672(h)(4)(A) and 2002(l)(4)(A) is omitted as obsolete.

In subsection (c)(5)(A), the words “for the purposes of this paragraph” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (c)(5)(C), the words “an additional period of” and “and care” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (c)(6)(C), the words “relating to coordination of Federal information policies” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (c)(7), the words “regulation under” are omitted as surplus. The word “because” is substituted for “on the basis of the fact that” to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsection (d)(2), the words “(relating to coordination of Federal information policy)” are omitted as surplus.

Section 3(h)(1)(A) of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968, referred to in subsec. (c)(2)(A), (5)(B), is section 3(h)(1)(A) of Pub. L. 90–481, which was classified to section 1672(h)(1)(A) of former Title 49, Transportation, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–272, § 7(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1379. For further details, see Historical and Revision Notes above.

Section 203(l)(1)(A) of the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of 1979, referred to in subsec. (c)(2)(A), (5)(B), is section 203(l)(1)(A) of Pub. L. 96–129, which was classified to section 2002(l)(1)(A) of former Title 49, Transportation, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–272, § 7(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1379. For further details, see Historical and Revision Notes above.

2016—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 114–183 added subsec. (e).

2012—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 112–90, § 18(a), substituted “a gas pipeline” for “an intrastate gas pipeline”.

Subsec. (c)(8). Pub. L. 112–90, § 21(c), added par. (8).

Subsec. (d)(4). Pub. L. 112–90, § 7(a), added par. (4).

1996—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 104–304, § 6(1), struck out “transporting gas or hazardous liquid or” after “Each person” and “a person”.

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 104–304, § 6(2), struck out after first sentence “However, an inspection must occur at least once every 2 years.”

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–304, § 6(3), substituted “Other Waters” for “Navigable Waters” in heading.

Subsec. (c)(2)(A)(ii). Pub. L. 104–304, § 6(4), added cl. (ii) and struck out former cl. (ii) which read as follows: “any other pipeline facility crossing under, over, or through navigable waters (as defined by the Secretary) if the Secretary decides that the location of the facility in those navigable waters could pose a hazard to navigation or public safety.”

Subsec. (c)(2)(B). Pub. L. 104–304, § 20(h)(1), substituted “standards” for “regulations” in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (c)(4)(A). Pub. L. 104–304, § 20(h)(2), substituted “establish a standard” for “require by regulation”.

Subsecs. (c)(4)(B), (d)(3). Pub. L. 104–304, § 20(h)(1), substituted “standards” for “regulations”.

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

Pub. L. 114–183, § 10, June 22, 2016, 130 Stat. 520, provided that: “(a) In General.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [June 22, 2016], the Secretary of Transportation shall convene a working group to consider the development of a voluntary information-sharing system to encourage collaborative efforts to improve inspection information feedback and information sharing with the purpose of improving gas transmission and hazardous liquid pipeline facility integrity risk analysis. “(b) Membership.—The working group convened pursuant to subsection (a) shall include representatives from—“(1) the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration; “(2) industry stakeholders, including operators of pipeline facilities, inspection technology, coating, and cathodic protection vendors, and pipeline inspection organizations; “(3) safety advocacy groups; “(4) research institutions; “(5) State public utility commissions or State officials responsible for pipeline safety oversight; “(6) State pipeline safety inspectors; “(7) labor representatives; and “(8) other entities, as determined appropriate by the Secretary. “(c) Considerations.—The working group convened pursuant to subsection (a) shall consider and provide recommendations to the Secretary on—“(1) the need for, and the identification of, a system to ensure that dig verification data are shared with in-line inspection operators to the extent consistent with the need to maintain proprietary and security-sensitive data in a confidential manner to improve pipeline safety and inspection technology; “(2) ways to encourage the exchange of pipeline inspection information and the development of advanced pipeline inspection technologies and enhanced risk analysis; “(3) opportunities to share data, including dig verification data between operators of pipeline facilities and in-line inspector vendors to expand knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of in-line inspection technology and methodologies; “(4) options to create a secure system that protects proprietary data while encouraging the exchange of pipeline inspection information and the development of advanced pipeline inspection technologies and enhanced risk analysis; “(5) means and best practices for the protection of safety- and security-sensitive information and proprietary information; and “(6) regulatory, funding, and legal barriers to sharing the information described in paragraphs (1) through (4). “(d) Publication.—The Secretary shall publish the recommendations provided under subsection (c) on a publicly available Web site of the Department of Transportation.”

Pub. L. 114–183, § 11, June 22, 2016, 130 Stat. 521, provided that: “(a) Report.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [June 22, 2016], the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the feasibility of establishing a national integrated pipeline safety regulatory inspection database to improve communication and collaboration between the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and State pipeline regulators. “(b) Contents.—The report submitted under subsection (a) shall include—“(1) a description of any efforts underway to test a secure information-sharing system for the purpose described in subsection (a); “(2) a description of any progress in establishing common standards for maintaining, collecting, and presenting pipeline safety regulatory inspection data, and a methodology for sharing the data; “(3) a description of any inadequacies or gaps in State and Federal inspection, enforcement, geospatial, or other pipeline safety regulatory inspection data; “(4) a description of the potential safety benefits of a national integrated pipeline safety regulatory inspection database; and “(5) recommendations, including those of stakeholders for how to implement a secure information-sharing system that protects proprietary and security sensitive information and data for the purpose described in subsection (a). “(c) Consultation.—In implementing this section, the Secretary shall consult with stakeholders, including each State authority operating under a certification to regulate intrastate pipelines under section 60105 of title 49, United States Code. “(d) Establishment of Database.—The Secretary may establish, if appropriate, a national integrated pipeline safety regulatory database—“(1) after submission of the report required under subsection (a); or “(2) upon notification to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate of the need to establish such database prior to the submission of the report under subsection (a).”

Pub. L. 114–183, § 29, June 22, 2016, 130 Stat. 532, provided that: “(a) In General.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act [June 22, 2016], the Administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration shall submit to Congress a report on the metrics provided to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and other Federal and State agencies related to lost and unaccounted for natural gas from distribution pipelines and systems. “(b) Elements.—The report required under subsection (a) shall include the following elements:“(1) An examination of different reporting requirements or standards for lost and unaccounted for natural gas to different agencies, the reasons for any such discrepancies, and recommendations for harmonizing and improving the accuracy of reporting. “(2) An analysis of whether separate or alternative reporting could better measure the amounts and identify the location of lost and unaccounted for natural gas from natural gas distribution systems. “(3) A description of potential safety issues associated with natural gas that is lost and unaccounted for from natural gas distribution systems. “(4) An assessment of whether alternate reporting and measures will resolve any safety issues identified under paragraph (3), including an analysis of the potential impact, including potential savings, on rate payers and end users of natural gas products of such reporting and measures. “(c) Consideration of Recommendations.—If the Administrator determines that alternate reporting structures or recommendations included in the report required under subsection (a) would significantly improve the reporting and measurement of lost and unaccounted for gas and safety of natural gas distribution systems, the Administrator shall, not later than 1 year after making such determination, issue regulations, as the Administrator determines appropriate, to implement the recommendations.”

Pub. L. 114–183, § 30, June 22, 2016, 130 Stat. 533, provided that: “(a) Review.—The Administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration shall conduct a State-by-State review of State-level policies that—“(1) encourage the repair and replacement of leaking natural gas distribution pipelines or systems that pose a safety threat, such as timelines to repair leaks and limits on cost recovery from ratepayers; and “(2) may create barriers for entities to conduct work to repair and replace leaking natural gas pipelines or distribution systems. “(b) Report.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act [June 22, 2016], the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report containing the findings of the review conducted under subsection (a) and recommendations on Federal or State policies or best practices to improve safety by accelerating the repair and replacement of natural gas pipelines or systems that are leaking or releasing natural gas. The report shall consider the potential impact, including potential savings, of the implementation of such recommendations on ratepayers or end users of the natural gas pipeline system. “(c) Implementation of Recommendations.—If the Administrator determines that the recommendations made under subsection (b) would significantly improve pipeline safety, the Administrator shall, not later than 1 year after making such determination, and in coordination with the heads of other relevant agencies as appropriate, issue regulations, as the Administrator determines appropriate, to implement the recommendations.”

Pub. L. 112–90, § 8, Jan. 3, 2012, 125 Stat. 1911, provided that: “(a) Leak Detection Report.—“(1) In general.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [Jan. 3, 2012], the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report on leak detection systems utilized by operators of hazardous liquid pipeline facilities and transportation-related flow lines. “(2) Contents.—The report shall include—“(A) an analysis of the technical limitations of current leak detection systems, including the ability of the systems to detect ruptures and small leaks that are ongoing or intermittent, and what can be done to foster development of better technologies; and “(B) an analysis of the practicability of establishing technically, operationally, and economically feasible standards for the capability of such systems to detect leaks, and the safety benefits and adverse consequences of requiring operators to use leak detection systems. “(b) Rulemaking Requirements.—“(1) Review period defined.—In this subsection, the term ‘review period’ means the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act [Jan. 3, 2012] and ending on the earlier of—“(A) the date that is 1 year after the date of completion of the report under subsection (a); or “(B) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. “(2) Congressional authority.—In order to provide Congress the necessary time to review the results of the report required by subsection (a) and implement appropriate recommendations, the Secretary, during the review period, shall not issue final regulations described in paragraph (3). “(3) Standards.—As soon as practicable following the review period, if the report required by subsection (a) finds that it is practicable to establish technically, operationally, and economically feasible standards for the capability of leak detection systems to detect leaks, the Secretary shall issue final regulations that—“(A) require operators of hazardous liquid pipeline facilities to use leak detection systems where practicable; and “(B) establish technically, operationally, and economically feasible standards for the capability of such systems to detect leaks. “(4) Savings clause.—“(A) In general.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, the Secretary, during the review period, may issue final regulations described in paragraph (3) if the Secretary determines that a condition that poses a risk to public safety, property, or the environment is present or an imminent hazard exists and that the regulations will address the risk or hazard. “(B) Imminent hazard defined.—In subparagraph (A), the term ‘imminent hazard’ means the existence of a condition related to pipelines or pipeline operations that presents a substantial likelihood that death, serious illness, severe personal injury, or substantial endangerment to health, property, or the environment may occur.”

[Terms used in section 8 of Pub. L. 112–90, set out above, have the meaning given those terms in this chapter, see section 1(c)(1) of Pub. L. 112–90, set out as a note under section 60101 of this title.]

Pub. L. 107–355, § 25, Dec. 17, 2002, 116 Stat. 3011, required the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study to determine whether cable-suspension pipeline bridges pose structural or other risks warranting particularized attention in connection with pipeline operators risk assessment programs and whether particularized inspection standards need to be developed by the Department of Transportation to recognize the peculiar risks posed by such bridges and to transmit a report detailing the results of the completed study within 2 years after Dec. 17, 2002.

Pub. L. 102–508, title III, § 307, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3309, directed Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with State and other Federal agencies having authority over underwater natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline facilities and with pipeline owners and operators, fishing and maritime industries, and other affected groups, to submit to Congress, not later than 3 years after Oct. 24, 1992, report and recommendations on abandonment of such pipeline facilities, including analysis of problems caused by such facilities, alternative methods to abandonment, as well as navigational, safety, economic, and environmental impacts associated with abandonment, and further authorized Secretary to require, based on findings of such study, additional appropriate actions to prevent hazards to navigation in connection with such facilities.