Let me outline the necessity of the second-degree amendment. We have a unique situation in Alaska with the 800-mile Trans-Alaska Pipeline which moves about 20 percent of the total crude oil produced in this country but is not protected in the sense of the pipeline safety act because our pipeline is completely within the State's borders. I am not going to argue with those who have analyzed this. But clearly our rivers are in interstate commerce. The fish in the rivers are in interstate commerce. But even though our pipeline goes basically from the Arctic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean it apparently may not be protected under the criminal penalties of the pipeline safety act. As a consequence, the amendment I am about to offer includes intrastate pipelines that transport gas in interstate commerce within the criminal penalty section of the pipeline safety act that currently only protects interstate pipelines. An incident occurred in my State of Alaska last fall where an individual fired a weapon and hit the 800-mile Trans-Alaska Pipeline.
On the recordMarch 7, 2002
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the need for an amendment to protect the Trans-Alaska Pipeline under the pipeline safety act.
Share
More from Lisa Murkowski
Jun 19, 2026
The National Science Foundation’s decision to leave the Ocean Observatories Initiative’s buoys in place is a massive win for coastal communities and fishermen around the country.
Aug 7, 2026
ALS is indiscriminate and devastating. It can strike any of us, and it will take all of us working together to support those affected and help end this terminal disease.
Aug 19, 2026
Kyle brings extensive knowledge of both our state and our court system to the federal bench, having served the District of Alaska as a federal prosecutor and U.S. Magistrate Judge, a position he has held in Alaska for the past five years.





