WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Senate Commerce Committee postponed a markup hearing on a carbon pipeline law that would set national standards for companies that install and maintain Co2 capture and transmission projects. The October 8 hearing was to be led by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

At the center of the current discussion is Cruz’s Pipeline Safety Act (S.2975), introduced on October 6, which would reauthorize the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) in regulating the siting of interstate Co2 pipeline. The bill would provide $1.65 billion to maintain a pipeline safety program for five years. The legislation includes key measures to reduce pipeline-related fatalities and injuries, advance the development of new pipeline safety technologies, enhance safety inspections and enforcement efforts and promote education for local communities on PHMSA’s work. 

Siting a carbon dioxide (CO2) pipeline refers to the process of determining its physical location and obtaining the necessary permits and land rights for its construction and operation.

It also requires PHMSA to update parts of its regulations to account for new pipeline materials, gases and operating practices. There is currently no federal agency that determines siting of carbon dioxide pipelines (the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has exclusive authority to regulate the siting of interstate gas transmission pipelines).

Environmental and property rights groups are celebrating the delay, which some say was the result of a late amendment to the resolution by Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.). Sheehy’s amendment would threaten free speech and prohibit collective action by denying American citizens from protesting at pipeline construction sites, according to a letter signed by 80 various organizations and delivered to Cruz, who chairs the committee, in time for the hearing.

“On behalf of an alliance of public-interest, landowner, Indigenous, and environmental justice organizations, we write to express our deep concern with the pipeline criminalization amendment to the Pipeline Safety Act proposed by Sen. Sheehy. Rather than focusing on common-sense regulations that would protect public safety, Sen. Sheehy is focused on threatening free speech and preventing collective action,” according to the letter, which was sent to Cruz and ranking committee member Maria Cantwell. 

“We just had the deadliest two-year period in pipeline safety since 2015. Clearly, we need a more proactive approach to the safe transportation of our nation’s energy products,” said bill co-sponsor and committee Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) “This bill does just that by increasing civil penalties by 50 percent, eliminating gaps in hydrogen and carbon dioxide pipeline requirements, and requiring permanent cybersecurity standards for pipeline operators.” 

According to Cruz, the PIPELINE Safety Act of 2025 ensures “oversight of the pipeline system is governed by appropriate, data-driven, and cost-effective standards.”

A related bill, the Promoting Innovation in Pipeline Efficiency and Safety (PIPES) Act of 2025 (HR 5301), was introduced in the House of Representatives on September 11. The bipartisan bill would reauthorize PHMSA’s pipeline safety programs for the next four years and provide an efficient, effective framework to advance the safety of U.S. energy infrastructure.

“The PIPES Act will reinforce the safety oversight of millions of miles of existing pipelines – as well as new carbon dioxide and hydrogen pipelines – and dedicate funding to replacing aging pipes.” said House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Ranking Member Rick Larsen.

Several environmental groups asked for a seat at the table during the negotiation of the pipeline bills, including the Eco-Justice Collaborative, which asked that any pipeline safety bill compel the PHMSA to:  

1. Require operators and developers to disclose emergency-response information to state and local first responders, route permitting agencies, and the public, including plume dispersion maps, to allow rigorous state, local, and private emergency response planning and route selection.  

 2. Require CO2 pipeline companies to fund local emergency response planning and preparedness, including training, drills, equipment, personal protective equipment, and real-time public alert systems.

 3. Ensure nothing in the Pipeline Safety Act prevents states and local governments from setting zoning and routing requirements for hazardous liquid or CO2 pipeline facilities that serve safety objectives, consistent with PHMSA’s understanding.

In a recent letter, the PHMSA said it will continue to support and encourage all three levels of government—federal, state, and local—working collaboratively to ensure the nation’s pipeline systems are constructed and operated in a manner that protects public safety and the environment. The letter read, in part:

“PHMSA believes pipeline safety is the shared responsibility of federal and state regulators as well as all other stakeholders, including pipeline operators, excavators, property owners, and local governments. In 2010, PHMSA launched the Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA)—to help pipeline safety stakeholders define their respective roles related to land use practices near pipelines and to develop best practices. PHMSA looks forward to…updating these documents to focus on the unique circumstances of new pipeline construction.”