PHMSA’s Pipeline Safety Reauthorization: Funding Issues
link to page 2 
INSIGHTi
PHMSA’s Pipeline Safety Reauthorization:
Funding Issues
Updated August 10, 2020
Introduction
The federal pipeline safety program is administered by the Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s)
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), working with state pipeline safety
regulators. Together, the federal and state agencies regulate the safety of the nation’s hazardous liquid
(e.g., crude oil) and natural gas pipelines. Under the PIPES Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-183), funding
authorization for PHMSA’s pipeline safety program expired on October 1, 2019. Although the Further
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94) includes pipeline safety appropriations for FY2020,
Congress is debating at what levels the program should next be authorized. The Trump Administration’s
FY2019 and FY2020 budgets have proposed reducing PHMSA’s pipeline safety funding whereas House
and Senate bills would authorize increased funding at different levels.
Past Budget Authority
PHMSA’s pipeline safety program is funded primarily by user fees assessed on each regulated pipeline
operator. PHMSA collects additional fees from underground natural gas storage facility operators to fund
storage regulatory activities as part of its pipeline safety program. Much of PHMSA’s budget is used to
pay safety inspectors, either directly as federal employees or indirectly as state employees through state
grants. By statute, PHMSA may pay up to 80% of the cost of personnel, equipment, and activities of a
certified state pipeline safety agency. PHMSA’s total annual budget authority for pipeline safety has
grown since 2001 (Figure 1). For FY2019, PHMSA’s enacted authority was $165 million—more than
double the agency’s budget authority in FY2008 (not adjusted for inflation).
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11162
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
link to page 3
Congressional Research Service
2
Figure 1. PHMSA Pipeline Safety Total Annual Budget Authority FY2001-FY2019
(Millions of Dollars)
Sources: U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Department of Transportation.
Notes: Includes funds from the Pipeline Safety Fund, the Oil Spil Liability Trust Fund, and the Underground Natural Gas
Storage Facility Safety accounts.
Reauthorization Proposals
On June 3, 2019, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao proposed pipeline safety budget authority for
PHMSA of approximately $149 million for FY2020, which would have been roughly 10% less than the
FY2019 budget authority ($165 million). The Trump Administration’s pipeline safety budget request of
February 11, 2020, is for $161 million for FY2021.
On August 6, 2020, the Senate passed the PIPES Act of 2019 (S. 2299) with proposed budget authority of
$180 million in FY2020 rising to $195 million in FY2023. On November 19, 2019, the House Energy and
Commerce Committee reported the SAFER Pipelines Act of 2019 (H.R. 5120) with proposed pipeline
safety budget authority of approximately $195 million in FY2020 rising to approximately $211 million in
FY2023. On November 20, 2019, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee also reported
H.R. 5120 with the same budget authority. Compared to PHMSA’s FY2019 budget authority, the House
and Senate bills would increase PHMSA’s pipeline safety authorization by roughly 18% and 9%,
respectively, for FY2020. P.L. 116-94 appropriates $168 million for pipeline safety in FY2020, a 1.8%
increase over the FY2019 authorization. Figure 2 compares the administration’s budget requests, the
FY2020 appropriation, and the funding proposals in the Senate and House bills.
Congressional Research Service
3
Figure 2. Pipeline Safety Budget Authority FY2016-FY2023, and FY2020 Appropriation
(Millions of Dollars)
Source: U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Department of Transportation, S. 2299 as reported by the Senate
Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee; H.R. 5120 as reported by the House Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Notes: Includes funds from the Pipeline Safety Fund, the Oil Spil Liability Trust Fund, and the Underground Natural Gas
Storage Facility Safety accounts. The FY2020 DOT proposal contains “such sums as may be necessary” for fiscal years
2021 through 2023, and does not specify an amount for each year. All values are authorization amounts, except P.L. 116-
94, which is an appropriation.
PHMSA Resource Considerations
As Congress has considered funding levels for pipeline safety, the following have been key issues:
State Grant Levels. Although PHMSA may reimburse states for up to 80% of their
pipeline safety expenditures, in 2017 (the latest year for which the data are published)
actual grant awards to states covered 68% of state expenditures, on average. Pipeline
safety advocates argue that grant levels below 80% hamper the states’ ability to maintain
the most qualified workforce and perform critical functions. However, DOT and some
state officials have countered that states may increase pipeline safety agency funding
through state-levied pipeline user fees if they believe they need more resources.
Inspector Pay. PHMSA has long faced challenges hiring and retaining its own federal
inspectors, largely due to industry recruitment of the same candidates PHMSA seeks
(engineers). A 2017 DOT Inspector General (IG) report confirmed “a significant gap
between private industry and Federal salaries for the types of engineers PHMSA hires.”
Some in Congress have proposed granting PHMSA special pay authority for engineers to
compete with industry. Higher pay for inspectors could require more funding for salaries.
Rulemaking Resources. Congress has used prior reauthorizations to impose on PHMSA
various mandates. Many Members of Congress are concerned that major mandates
remain unfulfilled years beyond the deadlines specified in statute. For example, as of July
1, 2019, according to its own assessment PHMSA had not fulfilled six mandates under
the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-90).
According to an IG report, PHMSA’s rulemaking processes have contributed to the
delays, but some have suggested that staffing limitations may also be a factor. However,
Congressional Research Service
4
the PHMSA administrator testified in 2018 that the agency had adequate staffing and
funding for rulemaking.
Authorization Lapse
In situations where PHMSA’s authorization expires before reauthorization, the agency’s pipeline safety
program can continue to operate and can still be funded—as it has been by P.L. 116-94—based upon its
expired authorization, subject to any instructions in an appropriations act. In such cases, PHMSA looks to
legislative history to indicate that Congress did not intend for its programs to terminate. Such a
circumstance would differ from an appropriations lapse, such as occurred during the 2018-2019
government shutdown. In that specific instance, DOT published a plan for continuing operations which
included extensive furloughs of PHMSA’s pipeline safety staff, primarily in administrative functions.
Author Information
Paul W. Parfomak
Specialist in Energy and Infrastructure Policy
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11162 · VERSION 16 · UPDATED
INSIGHTi
PHMSA’s Pipeline Safety Reauthorization:
Funding Issues
Updated August 10, 2020
Introduction
The federal pipeline safety program is administered by the Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s)
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), working with state pipeline safety
regulators. Together, the federal and state agencies regulate the safety of the nation’s hazardous liquid
(e.g., crude oil) and natural gas pipelines. Under the PIPES Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-183), funding
authorization for PHMSA’s pipeline safety program expired on October 1, 2019. Although the Further
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94) includes pipeline safety appropriations for FY2020,
Congress is debating at what levels the program should next be authorized. The Trump Administration’s
FY2019 and FY2020 budgets have proposed reducing PHMSA’s pipeline safety funding whereas House
and Senate bills would authorize increased funding at different levels.
Past Budget Authority
PHMSA’s pipeline safety program is funded primarily by user fees assessed on each regulated pipeline
operator. PHMSA collects additional fees from underground natural gas storage facility operators to fund
storage regulatory activities as part of its pipeline safety program. Much of PHMSA’s budget is used to
pay safety inspectors, either directly as federal employees or indirectly as state employees through state
grants. By statute, PHMSA may pay up to 80% of the cost of personnel, equipment, and activities of a
certified state pipeline safety agency. PHMSA’s total annual budget authority for pipeline safety has
grown since 2001 (Figure 1). For FY2019, PHMSA’s enacted authority was $165 million—more than
double the agency’s budget authority in FY2008 (not adjusted for inflation).
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11162
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
link to page 3
Congressional Research Service
2
Figure 1. PHMSA Pipeline Safety Total Annual Budget Authority FY2001-FY2019
(Millions of Dollars)
Sources: U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Department of Transportation.
Notes: Includes funds from the Pipeline Safety Fund, the Oil Spil Liability Trust Fund, and the Underground Natural Gas
Storage Facility Safety accounts.
Reauthorization Proposals
On June 3, 2019, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao proposed pipeline safety budget authority for
PHMSA of approximately $149 million for FY2020, which would have been roughly 10% less than the
FY2019 budget authority ($165 million). The Trump Administration’s pipeline safety budget request of
February 11, 2020, is for $161 million for FY2021.
On August 6, 2020, the Senate passed the PIPES Act of 2019 (S. 2299) with proposed budget authority of
$180 million in FY2020 rising to $195 million in FY2023. On November 19, 2019, the House Energy and
Commerce Committee reported the SAFER Pipelines Act of 2019 (H.R. 5120) with proposed pipeline
safety budget authority of approximately $195 million in FY2020 rising to approximately $211 million in
FY2023. On November 20, 2019, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee also reported
H.R. 5120 with the same budget authority. Compared to PHMSA’s FY2019 budget authority, the House
and Senate bills would increase PHMSA’s pipeline safety authorization by roughly 18% and 9%,
respectively, for FY2020. P.L. 116-94 appropriates $168 million for pipeline safety in FY2020, a 1.8%
increase over the FY2019 authorization. Figure 2 compares the administration’s budget requests, the
FY2020 appropriation, and the funding proposals in the Senate and House bills.
Congressional Research Service
3
Figure 2. Pipeline Safety Budget Authority FY2016-FY2023, and FY2020 Appropriation
(Millions of Dollars)
Source: U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Department of Transportation, S. 2299 as reported by the Senate
Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee; H.R. 5120 as reported by the House Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Notes: Includes funds from the Pipeline Safety Fund, the Oil Spil Liability Trust Fund, and the Underground Natural Gas
Storage Facility Safety accounts. The FY2020 DOT proposal contains “such sums as may be necessary” for fiscal years
2021 through 2023, and does not specify an amount for each year. All values are authorization amounts, except P.L. 116-
94, which is an appropriation.
PHMSA Resource Considerations
As Congress has considered funding levels for pipeline safety, the following have been key issues:
State Grant Levels. Although PHMSA may reimburse states for up to 80% of their
pipeline safety expenditures, in 2017 (the latest year for which the data are published)
actual grant awards to states covered 68% of state expenditures, on average. Pipeline
safety advocates argue that grant levels below 80% hamper the states’ ability to maintain
the most qualified workforce and perform critical functions. However, DOT and some
state officials have countered that states may increase pipeline safety agency funding
through state-levied pipeline user fees if they believe they need more resources.
Inspector Pay. PHMSA has long faced challenges hiring and retaining its own federal
inspectors, largely due to industry recruitment of the same candidates PHMSA seeks
(engineers). A 2017 DOT Inspector General (IG) report confirmed “a significant gap
between private industry and Federal salaries for the types of engineers PHMSA hires.”
Some in Congress have proposed granting PHMSA special pay authority for engineers to
compete with industry. Higher pay for inspectors could require more funding for salaries.
Rulemaking Resources. Congress has used prior reauthorizations to impose on PHMSA
various mandates. Many Members of Congress are concerned that major mandates
remain unfulfilled years beyond the deadlines specified in statute. For example, as of July
1, 2019, according to its own assessment PHMSA had not fulfilled six mandates under
the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-90).
According to an IG report, PHMSA’s rulemaking processes have contributed to the
delays, but some have suggested that staffing limitations may also be a factor. However,
Congressional Research Service
4
the PHMSA administrator testified in 2018 that the agency had adequate staffing and
funding for rulemaking.
Authorization Lapse
In situations where PHMSA’s authorization expires before reauthorization, the agency’s pipeline safety
program can continue to operate and can still be funded—as it has been by P.L. 116-94—based upon its
expired authorization, subject to any instructions in an appropriations act. In such cases, PHMSA looks to
legislative history to indicate that Congress did not intend for its programs to terminate. Such a
circumstance would differ from an appropriations lapse, such as occurred during the 2018-2019
government shutdown. In that specific instance, DOT published a plan for continuing operations which
included extensive furloughs of PHMSA’s pipeline safety staff, primarily in administrative functions.
Author Information
Paul W. Parfomak
Specialist in Energy and Infrastructure Policy
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11162 · VERSION 16 · UPDATED