The bill replaces the narrow phrase "damaging or destroying" in 49 U.S.C. §60123(b) with a longer list of prohibited conduct: "damaging, destroying, vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction of." The statutory amendment thus makes a wider set of acts subject to the existing federal criminal regime that covers interference with pipeline facilities.
This change matters because it extends federal coverage beyond physical destruction to include forms of interference and disruption that have in recent years been central to protests and civil disobedience at pipeline sites. Operators, construction contractors, prosecutors, and civil-liberties stakeholders will need to reassess the legal risks and enforcement calculus that follow from the broader language.
At a Glance
What It Does
SB1017 substitutes a longer list of prohibited conduct for the phrase "damaging or destroying" in 49 U.S.C. §60123(b), explicitly adding vandalizing, tampering, disrupting, and preventing the operation or construction of pipeline facilities. The existing criminal penalties tied to that statutory subsection remain in place; the bill changes the scope of conduct covered, not the penalty schedule.
Who It Affects
The amendment directly affects pipeline owners and operators, construction contractors working on pipeline projects, individuals and groups engaging in site interference or protest activity, and federal prosecutors and agencies that enforce pipeline safety statutes, principally DOT/PHMSA and the Department of Justice. State and local law enforcement may also see changed referral patterns.
Why It Matters
By expanding the catalogue of criminalized acts, the bill gives federal authorities a broader legal hook to pursue interference with pipelines, including acts that may not involve physical destruction. That shift alters compliance priorities for operators and raises questions about how courts will interpret terms like "disrupting" and "preventing."
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB1017 is short and focused: it swaps a single two-word phrase inside the federal pipeline-crime statute for a much longer list of conduct. Where the statute formerly criminalized "damaging or destroying" pipeline facilities, the amended text specifies "damaging, destroying, vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction of." That single textual substitution is the bill's entire substantive change.
Because the amendment sits inside the existing subsection of 49 U.S.C. that creates criminal liability for interference with pipeline facilities, the practical effect is that a wider variety of actions—ranging from vandalism to non-physical interference with operation or construction—fall within the federal offense. The bill does not change sentencing provisions or introduce new categories of penalties; it enlarges the set of acts that can be prosecuted under the provision that already carries criminal sanctions.The language reaches both operational and construction phases of pipeline projects.
That matters for compliance: construction sites and temporary facilities, which previously may have been policed under trespass or local ordinances, are now explicitly within the statutory description. Operators and contractors should expect that federal authorities could treat some construction-phase disruptions as felonious or otherwise criminal under the federal statute.Two practical issues will drive litigation and enforcement choices.
First, key terms in the new list—"disrupting," "preventing," and "tampering with"—are capacious and not defined in the bill, so courts will be asked to cabin those words. Second, the broader wording overlaps with other federal and state offenses (e.g., obstruction, trespass, sabotage statutes), creating questions about prosecutorial discretion and which authorities lead enforcement.
Those interpretive gaps will determine how far the statute reaches into protest activity and nonviolent interference.
The Five Things You Need to Know
SB1017 amends 49 U.S.C. §60123(b) by replacing the words "damaging or destroying" with: "damaging, destroying, vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction of.", The bill does not alter the penalty provisions attached to §60123(b); it expands the conduct that can trigger the existing federal criminal penalties rather than changing sentencing.
The amendment explicitly covers interference with both the operation and the construction of pipeline facilities, extending federal coverage to construction-site activity.
Key operative terms added by the bill—"disrupting," "preventing," and "tampering with"—are undefined, creating space for litigation over statutory scope and mens rea requirements.
Because the change broadens the statutory hook, federal prosecutors, DOT/PHMSA, and operators may treat certain non-destructive protest tactics and site disruptions as prosecutable federal offenses where they previously relied on state or local authorities.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the Act as the "Safe and Secure Transportation of American Energy Act." This is a standard caption clause and does not affect statutory meaning or enforcement.
Amendment to 49 U.S.C. §60123(b) — expanded list of prohibited conduct
Substitutes the statute's narrow phrase "damaging or destroying" with a broader list of actions: "damaging, destroying, vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction of." Practically, that brings acts that interfere with function or construction—whether by altering equipment, obstructing operations, or otherwise impeding construction—within the scope of the federal offense. The section does not define the new terms, nor does it change punishment levels, so its impact will hinge on judicial interpretation and prosecutorial charging decisions.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Pipeline owners and operators — Gain a wider federal enforcement avenue to deter and prosecute interference, potentially lowering the operational risk from protests and construction-site disruptions.
- Department of Justice and federal prosecutors — Receive an expanded statutory basis to bring federal charges in cases involving tampering, disruption, or prevention of pipeline operation or construction, which can centralize enforcement at the federal level.
- Department of Transportation / PHMSA — Benefit from statutory language that aligns criminal liability more closely with pipeline safety and security objectives, supporting regulatory enforcement and coordination with industry.
- Investors and insurers in energy infrastructure — Stand to benefit indirectly from reduced risk of operational interruption if the expanded statute deters disruptive conduct and lowers claim exposure.
Who Bears the Cost
- Protesters and civil disobedience organizers — Face a broader risk of federal criminal charges for conduct that previously might have been treated as trespass or local ordinance violations, increasing legal and incarceration risk.
- Civil liberties and advocacy organizations — Will likely need to ramp up legal defenses and monitoring, and may challenge the statute's scope in court, consuming organizational resources.
- Construction contractors and site managers — May incur additional compliance and security costs to avoid activities that could be characterized as facilitating or enabling "disruption" or "prevention" of operations during construction.
- Federal and local law enforcement and prosecutors — Could experience increased case referrals and caseloads as more incidents are framed as federal offenses, requiring resources to investigate and litigate novel statutory interpretations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing the public interest in protecting critical energy infrastructure against the risk of criminalizing protest and nonviolent interference: the bill strengthens enforcement tools for pipeline security, but its broad, undefined language risks capturing constitutionally protected expression and ordinary construction disruptions unless courts or implementing guidance narrowly construe the new terms.
The bill's single-line substitution produces outsized interpretive consequences because it inserts broad, undefined verbs into an existing federal criminal statute. "Disrupting" and "preventing" can describe conduct ranging from severing a pipeline to a human blockade or digital interference; courts will need to decide whether the statute reaches nonviolent sit-ins, blockades, or other protest tactics. Absent statutory definitions or mens rea refinements, prosecutors have discretion to press federal charges in close cases, which could invite constitutional challenges and circuit splits over scope and intent requirements.
The amendment also changes the enforcement landscape across the construction lifecycle. Construction-phase disruptions—temporary actions that delay or impede building—are now explicitly within the statute's descriptive reach.
That raises practical questions about what evidence will suffice to prove criminal liability versus civil obstruction or trespass, and whether operators must adopt heightened security measures during construction. Finally, the change overlaps with other federal and state statutes (e.g., obstruction of commerce, sabotage, state criminal codes), so coordination among agencies and choice-of-jurisdiction decisions will matter; those procedural decisions will shape whether the amendment meaningfully increases federal prosecutions or simply duplicates existing authorities.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.