Pipeline Safety Bill Creates Confidential Data Hub, Shielding Shared Operator Information from Lawsuits and FOIA

This bill, the PHMSA Voluntary Information Sharing Act, is setting up a brand-new, confidential system for pipeline operators to share sensitive safety data. Think of it as a secure, non-punitive digital suggestion box for the pipeline industry. Within one year, the Secretary must launch this Voluntary Information-Sharing System (VIS) to collect things like risk analyses, lessons learned from near-misses, and process improvements across gas transmission, distribution, and hazardous liquid pipelines (Sec. 2).

The core idea is simple: if companies can share safety failures without fear of getting sued or fined, they’ll be more honest, and everyone can learn from those mistakes, ultimately making pipelines safer. The catch—and it’s a big one—is that any nonpublic data submitted to the VIS is explicitly protected. It can’t be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and it generally cannot be used as evidence in any litigation or to start an enforcement action against the operator. This shield is the whole point of the system, but it creates a serious trade-off between shared learning and public accountability.

The Confidentiality Shield: What It Means for Accountability

For the busy person, this confidentiality rule is where the rubber meets the road. If you live near a pipeline, or if your property is damaged by a pipeline incident, this bill changes what information you might be able to access. Currently, if an incident happens, lawyers or public interest groups can often use FOIA requests or the discovery process in a lawsuit to try and obtain internal documents showing if the company knew about a flaw. Under the VIS, if a company voluntarily shares a document detailing a known safety flaw before an incident, that document is largely protected from being used against them in court or by regulators (Sec. 2).

This creates a high-stakes balance. On one hand, operators might finally share the data about those scary near-misses that never make the news, allowing experts to flag systemic issues. On the other hand, it makes it much harder for the public—or regulators—to hold an operator accountable after a failure if the critical evidence was locked away in the VIS. The only way around the protection is if the data reveals a criminal violation or was already required to be reported under existing federal law.

Who’s Running the Show?

Setting the strategy for the VIS is a 15-member Governing Board, which the PHMSA Administrator must establish within 180 days. This Board is split evenly: five government experts (including the PHMSA Administrator), five industry representatives (like pipeline operators), and five public safety advocates (like environmental groups). This structure attempts to give everyone a seat at the table, but the Board’s decisions require a supermajority—two-thirds plus one member—to pass (Sec. 2). This means that at least 11 members must agree, which could lead to gridlock or allow a small coalition of industry and government members to veto proposed public reports or safety recommendations they don't like. The Board also gets to hire a Third-Party Data Manager, who is responsible for securely handling, de-identifying, and analyzing all the voluntarily submitted data.

Paying the Tab

To cover the immediate costs of setting up this complex system, the bill authorizes PHMSA to collect an extra $5 million annually from existing fees for fiscal years 2024 through 2027. While this is a temporary funding boost for the infrastructure, the Secretary is also tasked with exploring long-term, sustainable funding options, possibly through public-private partnerships. Ultimately, the cost of implementing this new safety system will likely be borne by the industry—and potentially passed on to consumers—but the bill aims to ensure the VIS doesn't become a financial burden on existing PHMSA resources during its crucial startup phase.