# EQUITRANS MIDSTREAM CORPORATION — Safety Order

**Citation:** CPF 12023053NOPSO  
**Type / status:** enforcement / current  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2023-08-11

OPEN safety order.

## Document text

Safety Order involving EQUITRANS MIDSTREAM CORPORATION. The dataset does not identify a cited regulation for this case. The case was opened on 2023-08-11 and is reported as open. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

12023053NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_10032023_(23-264189).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_10032023_(23-264189).pdf

12023053NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_10032023_(23-264189)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_10032023_(23-264189)_text.pdf

12023053NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_08112023_(23-264189).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Safety%20Order_08112023_(23-264189).pdf

12023053NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_08112023_(23-264189)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Safety%20Order_08112023_(23-264189)_text.pdf

12023053NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_10032023_(23-264189)_text.pdf

October 3, 2023
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cbaker@equitransmidstream.com
Cliff Baker
Senior Vice President
Commercial Development & Operations
Equitrans Midstream Corporation
2200 Energy Drive,
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317
CPF No. 1-2023-053-NOPSO
Dear Mr. Baker:
Enclosed please find a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement
between the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Equitrans
Midstream Corporation, which was executed on October 3, 2023. Service of the Consent Order
and Consent Agreement by electronic mail is effective upon the date of transmission and
acknowledgement of receipt as provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Alan K. Mayberry
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure: Order and Consent Agreement
cc: Ms. Linda Daugherty, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, Office of
Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Mr. Robert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Mr. Keith Coyle, Esq., Babst Calland, Outside Counsel for Equitrans Midstream
Corporation, kcoyle@babstcalland.com
CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUESTED



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
Equitrans Midstream Corporation, ) CPF No. 1-2023-053-NOPSO
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
CONSENT ORDER
By letter dated August 11, 2023, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety, issued a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice) to
Equitrans Midstream Corporation (Respondent).
In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, the Notice alleged that conditions exist at
Respondent’s Mountain Valley Pipeline in West Virginia and Virginia, that pose an integrity risk
to public safety, property, or the environment. The Notice also proposed that Respondent take
certain corrective measures to remedy the alleged conditions and ensure that the public, property,
and the environment are protected from the potential risk.
In response to the Notice, Respondent requested an informal consultation, whereupon the parties
engaged in good-faith settlement discussions that have resulted in the Consent Agreement
attached to this Consent Order that settles all of the allegations in the Notice.
Accordingly, the Consent Agreement is hereby approved and incorporated by reference into this
Consent Order. The Respondent is hereby ordered to comply with the terms of the Consent
Agreement, effective immediately.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., failure to comply with this Consent Order may result in
the assessment of civil penalties as set forth in 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.223, or in
referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.
The terms and conditions of this Consent Order are effective upon service in accordance with
49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
October 3, 2023
___________________________________ __________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
Equitrans Midstream Corporation, ) CPF No. 1-2023-053-NOPSO
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
CONSENT AGREEMENT
Pursuant to Chapter 601 of title 49, United States Code, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), initiated on-site inspections
and investigation of Equitrans Midstream Corporation’s (Respondent) Mountain Valley Pipeline
(MVP) in West Virginia and Virginia.1
The MVP encompasses the proposed and partially constructed 303-mile natural gas transmission
pipeline system in its entirety (Affected Facility). The Affected Facility, an interstate natural gas
pipeline (42-inch diameter, coated steel pipe) that has been under construction since 2018, is
subject to Federal pipeline safety laws and regulations, including the natural gas pipeline design
and construction safety regulations in 49 C.F.R. Part 192.
As a result of the investigation, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated August 11, 2023, a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice). The
Notice alleged that conditions exist on Respondent’s Affected Facility that pose a pipeline integrity
risk to public safety, property, or the environment. The Notice also proposed that Respondent take
certain corrective measures to remedy the alleged conditions and ensure that the public, property,
and the environment are protected from the alleged integrity risk.
On August 12, 2023, Respondent responded to the Notice by timely submitting a request for an
informal consultation under 49 C.F.R. § 190.239(b)(2). PHMSA and Respondent (the Parties)
held informal consultation meetings beginning on August 14, 2023.
As a result of the informal consultation, the Parties agree that settlement of this proceeding by
entry into this Consent Agreement (Agreement) is the most appropriate means of resolving the
issues raised in the Notice, will avoid further administrative proceedings or litigation, and is in the
1 The MVP is owned by Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, Series A (Mountain Valley), a joint venture of several
entities. An affiliate of Equitrans Midstream Corporation (OPID 31604) serves as the operator of MVP.



public interest. Therefore, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.239(b)(2), without adjudication of any
issue of law or fact, and upon consent and agreement, the Parties agree to the following terms and
conditions.
I. General Provisions
1. Respondent acknowledges that as the operator of the pipeline facilities subject to
the Notice, Respondent and its referenced pipeline facilities are subject to the jurisdiction of the
Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations and administrative
orders issued thereunder. For purposes of this Agreement, Respondent acknowledges that it
received proper notice of PHMSA’s action in this proceeding and that the Notice states claims
upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations and
orders issued thereunder.
2. Respondent does not admit or deny any of the allegations in the Notice but agrees,
for purposes of this Agreement, to complete the actions specified in Section II of this Agreement
(Corrective Measures) and to abide by the terms of this Agreement.
3. After Respondent returns this signed Agreement to PHMSA, the Agency’s
representative will present it to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, recommending that
the Associate Administrator adopt the terms of this Agreement by issuing an administrative order
(Consent Order) incorporating the terms of this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement constitute
an offer of settlement until accepted by the Associate Administrator. Once accepted, the Associate
Administrator will issue a Consent Order incorporating the terms of this Agreement.
4. Respondent consents to the issuance of the Consent Order, and hereby waives any
further procedural requirements with respect to its issuance. Respondent waives all rights to
contest the adequacy of notice, or the validity of the Consent Order or this Agreement, including
all rights to administrative or judicial hearings or appeals, except as set forth in the Dispute
Resolution provisions set forth herein.
5. This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon PHMSA and Respondent, its
officers, directors, and employees, and its successors, assigns, or other entities or persons
otherwise bound by law. Respondent agrees to provide a copy of this Agreement and any
incorporated work plans and schedules to all of Respondent’s officers, employees, and agents
whose duties might reasonably include compliance with this Agreement.
6. For all transfers of ownership or operating responsibility of Respondent’s pipeline
system referenced herein, Respondent will provide a copy of this Agreement to the prospective
transferee at least 30 days prior to such transfer. Respondent will provide written notice of the
transfer to the Director no later than 60 days after the transfer occurs.
7. This Agreement constitutes the final, complete and exclusive agreement and
understanding between the Parties with respect to the settlement embodied in this Agreement. The
Parties acknowledge that there are no representations, agreements or understandings relating to
settlement other than those expressly contained in this Agreement.



8. Nothing in this Agreement affects or relieves Respondent of its responsibility to
comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et
seq., and the regulations and orders issued thereunder. Nothing in this Agreement alters PHMSA's
right of access, entry, inspection, and information gathering or PHMSA's authority to bring
enforcement actions against Respondent pursuant to the Federal pipeline safety laws, the
regulations and orders issued thereunder, or any other provision of Federal or State law.
9. This Agreement does not waive or modify any Federal, State, or local laws or
regulations that are applicable to Respondent’s pipeline systems, including the provisions in the
Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub. L. No. 118-5, § 324. This Agreement is not a permit, or a
modification of any permit, under any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations. Respondent
remains responsible for achieving and maintaining compliance with all applicable Federal, State,
and local laws, regulations and permits.
10. This Agreement does not create rights in, or grant any cause of action to, any third
party not party to this Agreement. The U.S. Department of Transportation is not liable for any
injuries or damages to persons or property arising from acts or omissions of Respondent or its
officers, employees, or agents carrying out the work required by this Agreement. Respondent
agrees to hold harmless the U.S. Department of Transportation, its officers, employees, agents,
and representatives from any and all causes of action arising from any acts or omissions of
Respondent or its contractors in carrying out any work required by this Agreement.
11. This Agreement does not constitute a finding of violation of any Federal law or
regulation and may not be used in any civil or administrative proceeding of any kind as evidence or
proof of any fact, fault, or liability, or as evidence of the violation of any law, rule, regulation, or
requirement, except in a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this Agreement.
II. Corrective Measures:
12. Measures set forth below.
Upon issuance of the Consent Order, Respondent agrees to perform the Corrective
13. Definitions.
(A) “Director” means the Director, Eastern Region, OPS;
(B) “Effective Date” means the date on which the Consent Order is issued by
the Associate Administrator, PHMSA, incorporating the terms of this Agreement;
and,
(C) “Affected Facility” means the approximately 303-mile MVP pipeline
traversing the states of West Virginia and Virginia, commencing at mile post (MP)
0.0 in Wetzel County, West Virginia, and ending at MP 303.0 in Pittsylvania County,
Virginia, and includes all associated compressor stations and facilities.
(D) “Uninstalled Pipe” means pipe that:



(i) is stored on the pipeline right-of-way on or after the Effective Date (including in
the Bradley, West Virginia Yard, or at any other location outdoors) and which must
be installed to complete the construction of the Affected Facility; and
(ii) may have been installed on or after July 1, 2023, for which a deficiency must be
corrected under Corrective Measure 17(B)(ii).
(E) “KTA” means KTA-Tator, Inc., an independent third-party with expertise
and experience in assessing the coating type being utilized on the Affected Facility.
14. Reports/Results. Within 15 days of completing the actions specifically referenced
in Corrective Measures 16(A), 17(A), 18(A), 19(A), and by the alternate reporting deadlines
specified for Corrective Measure 19(B)-(C), Respondent must provide the written report
describing the results of that action to the Director.
15. Remedial Work Plan. Within 30 days of completing the actions specifically
referenced in Corrective Measures 16(B)(i), 17(A)-(C), and 18(B)(i), and 19(A)-(D), Respondent
must develop and submit a written remedial work plan (Work Plan or RWP) to the Director that
includes any necessary corrective measures. The Plan must include provisions to:
(A) Remediate any identified safety conditions, including the specific remedial
actions described in Corrective Measures 16(B)(ii), 17(A)-(C), 18(B)(ii), and 19
below, and identify the location and type of any necessary remediation activities;
(B) Include a proposed timeline for completion of the corrective measures;
(C) Revise the Plan as necessary to incorporate new information obtained
during the evaluations and associated remedial activities. Respondent must submit
any such revisions to the Director for prior approval;
(D) Allow the Director to approve Plan elements incrementally. Once approved,
the Plan shall become incorporated into the Consent Order; and
(E) Implement the Plan as it is approved by the Director, including any revisions
to the Plan. Results of actions taken in accordance with the approved Plan must be
available for review by PHMSA or its representative.
16. ACVG/DCVG Surveys.
(A) Prior to commissioning the Affected Facility, Respondent must:
(i) Conduct alternating current voltage gradient (ACVG), direct current
voltage gradient (DCVG), or other comparable inspection, testing, or surveys capable
of locating and assessing pipeline coating conditions indicative of potential corrosion



threats or anomalies, on all installed pipe segments, except for those installed and
tested after January 1, 2023;
(ii) A minimum of two (2) coating survey assessment classifications for survey
calibration must be excavated, classified, and/or remediated per each survey crew per
each time a survey is performed for each External Corrosion Direct assessment
(ECDA) region. ECDA regions are to be identified in accordance with NACE
International Standard Practice 0502-2010, “Pipeline External Corrosion Direct
Assessment Methodology,” (NACE SP 0502-2010) Section 3.5 Identification of
ECDA Regions. and,
(iii) Conduct excavations for each survey as provided in NACE SP 0502-2010,
Section 5.3 Guidelines for Determining the Required Number of Direct
Examinations.
(iv) A variance from the requirements of NACE SP 0502-2010 Sections 3.5 and
5.3, as applicable under 16(A)(ii)-(iii), may be obtained if Respondent submits a
request with an adequate explanation and supporting plan in advance to the Director
for approval.
(B) After completing the ACVG, DCVG, or other comparable inspection,
testing, or surveys required under Corrective Measure 16(A), Respondent must:
(i) and
Provide a written report to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 14;
(ii) Submit an RWP to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 15 for
remediating any damaged coating indications found during the assessments that are
classified as severe indications with voltage (IR) drop greater than 60 percent for
DCVG or 70 dBµV for ACVG, as provided in 49 C.F.R. § 192.461(h), or severe
based on NACE SP 0502-2010.
(C) Respondent’s plan for conducting the DCVG surveys required under this
Corrective Measure is described in Appendix I to this agreement.
17. Coating.
(A) Respondent shall:
(i) Provide to the Director KTA’s evaluation of the procedures that Respondent
is using to assess and remediate any potential damage to the coating for the
Uninstalled Pipe, including by performing adhesion tests to evaluate coating
performance;
(ii) Adopt any changes to the procedures that KTA determines are necessary to
ensure the safe installation of Uninstalled Pipe; and



(iii) Provide a written report to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 14
describing the results of KTA’s evaluation and any changes adopted to the
procedures under Corrective Measure 15.
(iv) The Director has received the evaluation, written report, and procedures
required under Corrective Measure 17(A)(i)-(iii) and approved the procedures that
Respondent is using to assess and remediate any potential damage to the coating
for the Uninstalled Pipe.
(B) After submitting the written report to the Director required under Corrective
Measure 17(A), Respondent shall:
(i) Require KTA to audit the implementation of the procedures for assessing
and remediating any potential damage to the coating for the Uninstalled Pipe at all
MVP spreads;
(ii) Take any actions that KTA, or the Director after consulting with KTA as
the independent third-party, determines are necessary to correct any deficiency in
implementing those procedures for any Uninstalled Pipe under the RWP; and
(iii) hours.
Notify the Director of any such deficiency and corrective actions within 24
(iv) The Director has received and approved Respondent’s plan for auditing the
implementation of the procedures for assessing and remediating any potential
damage to the coating for the Uninstalled Pipe at all MVP spreads.
(C) If KTA determines in conducting the audit that a change to the coating
assessment and remediation procedures is necessary to ensure the safe installation
of Uninstalled Pipe, Respondent shall immediately adopt the change and include it
in the RWP and notify the Director.
(D) If KTA is unable for any reason to perform the requirements in Corrective
Measures 17(A)-(C), Respondent shall:
(i) Immediately notify the Director; and
(ii) Within 15 days of notification of the Director, submit an RWP pursuant to
Corrective Measure 15 for approval of another independent third-party with
expertise and experience in assessing the coating type being utilized on the Affected
Facility. Coating assessment and remediation activities must cease upon KTA’s
end of performance and until another third party approved by the Director begins
coating audit activities.



(E) Respondent is authorized to continue assessing and remediating any
potential damage to the coating for the Uninstalled Pipe while completing the
construction of the Affected Facility, subject to applicable provisions in this
Agreement.
18. Cathodic Protection CIS Surveys.
(A) Within six months after commissioning, Respondent must assess the
effectiveness of the Affected Facility’s permanent CP system via a close interval
survey (CIS) to ensure MVP’s CP systems, including AC mitigation or
interferences measures, are operating as designed per National Association of
Corrosion Engineers (NACE) specified standards. The CIS must be conducted at a
maximum 5-foot spacing and with interrupted on/off current to meet the
requirements in §§ 192.463 and 192.465.
(B) After conducting the CIS, Respondent must:
(i) and
Provide a written report to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 14;
(ii) Submit an RWP to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 15 for
remediating any identified locations as necessary in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part
192, Subpart I.
19. ILI/Tool Runs.
(A) Prior to commissioning of the Affected Facility, Respondent must run a
low-resolution caliper tool capable of detecting dents and ovalities and remediate
any identified imperfection or damage in accordance with the requirements of 49
C.F.R. § 192.309. Respondent must provide a report to the Director pursuant to
Corrective Measure 14 within 15 days of completing the low-resolution caliper tool
run. If any segments of pipe are determined to have imperfection or damage that
requires remediation, Respondent must submit an RWP to the Director pursuant to
Corrective Measure 15 for remediating those segments.
(B) Within 90 days of commencing commercial natural gas transportation
service on the Affected Facility, Respondent must run a high-resolution inline
inspection (ILI) tool consisting of a magnetic flux leakage (MFL) tool with
incorporated inertial measurement unit (IMU) and high-resolution
caliper/deformation capabilities. After completing the tool run, Respondent must
analyze all areas on the Affected Facility to identify locations susceptible to
excessive external stresses, including, but not limited, to all sag locations and tie-
in welds, and for any corrosion-related or other integrity-related conditions that
require remediation under the applicable provisions in Subpart M or Subpart O of



Part 192.2 The tools required under this Corrective Measure 19(B) must have the
required sensitivity of measurements, and the highest resolution presently available
for sensor spacing and sampling rate, and capability of multiple readings per sensor
on the mechanical arm/sensor carrier (e.g., capable of additional readings such as
“stand-off” at the sensor carrier), with a required sensitivity of measurements that
enables repeatability in characterization and prioritization based upon anomaly
size. Respondent must provide preliminary and final analysis reports to the
Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 14 within 90 and 180 days of completing
the tool run. An analysis of areas potentially susceptible to excessive external
stresses on the Affected Facility must commence immediately following the
Effective Date.
(C) Within one year of completing the tool run required under Corrective
Measure 19(B), Respondent must run another tool with IMU capabilities. After
completing the tool run, Respondent must analyze areas on the Affected Facility
susceptible to excessive external stresses, including, but not limited, to all sag
locations and tie-in welds. Respondent must provide preliminary and final analysis
reports to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 14 within 90 and 180 days
of completing the tool run.
(D) Respondent must perform a comparative strain analysis utilizing the tool
run data attained in Corrective Measures 19(B)-(C) to more accurately identify
potential areas of strain that may warrant further investigation. If any segments of
pipe are determined to be subject to excessive external stress, Respondent must
submit an RWP to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 15 for remediating
those segments. Respondent must consult with appropriate subject matter experts
and determine appropriate acceptable action levels for geohazards and other
conditions. In the absence of an acceptable action level determination as agreed
upon with the Director, the default values of two (2) percent strain for pipe and 0.5
percent strain for girth welds will be utilized. After appropriate determination of
the action levels, Respondent shall remediate any identified locations above the
specified thresholds as required by the applicable provisions in Subpart M or
Subpart O of Part 192. Any other conditions discovered during the tool runs
performed under Corrective Measures 19(A)-(C) that are actionable under Part 192
must be remediated as contemplated by the applicable code sections and included
in the RWP submitted to the Director pursuant to Corrective Measure 15.
2 The requirements specified in the text of Subpart M or Subpart O of Part 192 on the Effective Date apply under the
terms of this paragraph 19, regardless of whether their general applicability to the pipeline industry is presently
effective (e.g., PHMSA’s enforcement discretion until February 2024 as to certain Part 192 requirements does not
apply under this paragraph 19 requirement to the MVP. See, e.g., LIMITED ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION FOR EXISTING
ONSHORE GAS TRANSMISSION PIPELINES REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECENTLY ISSUED GAS TRANSMISSION
FINAL RULE (87 FR 52224 (AUG. 24, 2022)); available online at:
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2022-
12/PHMSA%20Onshore%20Gas%20Transmission%20Notice%20of%20Limited%20Enforcement%20Discretion.p
df.



(E) Respondent may submit a request pursuant to Corrective Measure 23 to
extend the deadlines for completing the tool runs required under Corrective
Measures 19(A)-(C) for good cause, including tool availability concerns.
20. Additional Measures. After receiving and analyzing additional data during this
proceeding and implementation of the Corrective Measures described above, the Director may
identify other safety measures that need to be taken on the Affected Facility. In that event, the
Director will notify the Respondent of any proposed additional measures and, if necessary, may
seek to modify this Agreement pursuant to Paragraph 29.
21. Quarterly Reports. Respondent must submit quarterly reports to the Director
that: (1) include available data and results of the testing and evaluations required by the
Agreement; and (2) describe the progress of the repairs and other remedial actions being
undertaken. The first quarterly report shall be due 90 days from the Effective Date.
22. Final Summary Report. A final summary report of work performed on the above
items must be submitted to the Director within 30 days of the completion of the last action
performed by Respondent that is set forth in this Agreement.
23. Extensions of Time. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance
with any of the terms of the Agreement upon a written request, timely submitted, demonstrating
good cause for an extension. The Director shall respond in writing to any such request.
24. Documentation of Costs. It is requested that Respondent maintain documentation
of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Agreement and submit the total to
the Director. It is requested that these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated
with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies, and analyses; and 2) total cost associated
with replacements, additions, and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.
III. Review and Approval Process:
25. With respect to any submission under Section II (Corrective Measures) of this
Agreement that requires the approval of the Director, the Director may: (a) approve, in whole or
in part, the submission; (b) approve the submission on specified, reasonable conditions; (c)
disapprove, in whole or in part, the submission; or (d) any combination of the foregoing. If the
Director approves, approves in part, or approves with conditions, Respondent will take all actions
as approved by the Director, subject to Respondent’s right to invoke the dispute resolution
procedures with respect to any conditions the Director identifies. If the Director disapproves all
or any portion of the submission, the Director will provide Respondent a written notice of the
deficiencies, subject to Respondent’s right to invoke the dispute resolution procedures.
Respondent will correct all deficiencies within the time specified by the Director and resubmit it
for approval.
IV. Dispute Resolution:



26. The Director and Respondent will informally attempt to resolve any disputes arising
under this Agreement, including any decision of the Director under the terms of Section II
(Corrective Measures). If Respondent and the Director are unable to informally resolve the dispute
within 15 calendar days after the dispute is first raised, in writing, to the Director, Respondent may
submit a written request for a determination resolving the dispute from the Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety, PHMSA. Such request must be made in writing and provided to the Director,
counsel for Eastern Region, and to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, no later than
10 calendar days from the 15-day deadline for informal resolution referenced in this paragraph.
Along with its request, Respondent must provide the Associate Administrator with all information
Respondent believes is relevant to the dispute. Decisions of the Associate Administrator under
this paragraph will constitute final agency action subject to judicial review pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
§ 60119. The existence of a dispute and PHMSA’s consideration of matters placed in dispute will
not excuse, toll, or suspend any term or timeframe for completion of any work to be performed
under this Agreement during the pendency of the dispute resolution process.
V. Enforcement:
27. This Agreement is subject to all enforcement authorities available to PHMSA
under 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and 49 C.F.R. Part 190, including administrative civil penalties
under 49 U.S.C. § 60122, of up to $257,664 per violation for each day the violation continues and
referral of the case to the Attorney General for judicial enforcement, if PHMSA determines that
Respondent is not complying with the terms of this Agreement in accordance with the
determinations made by the Director, or in accordance with decisions of the Associate
Administrator if resolved pursuant to the Dispute Resolution process herein. The maximum civil
penalty amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 C.F.R. § 190.223. All work plans and
associated schedules set forth or referenced in Section II are automatically incorporated into this
Agreement and are enforceable in the same manner.
VI. Recordkeeping and Information Disclosure:
28. Unless otherwise required in this Agreement, Respondent agrees to maintain
records demonstrating compliance with all requirements of this Agreement for a period of at least
five (5) years following completion of all work to be performed. For any reports, plans, or other
deliverables required to be submitted to PHMSA pursuant to this Agreement, Respondent may
assert a claim of business confidentiality or other protections applicable to the release of
information by PHMSA, covering part or all of the information required to be submitted to
PHMSA pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 7. Respondent must mark
the claim of confidentiality in writing on each page and include a statement specifying the grounds
for each claim of confidentially. PHMSA determines release of any information submitted
pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 7, the Freedom of Information Act,
5 U.S.C. § 552, DOT and PHMSA policies, and other applicable regulations and Executive Orders.
VII. Modification:
29. The terms of this Agreement may be modified by mutual agreement of the Parties.
Such modifications must be in writing and signed by both parties.



VIII. Termination:
30. This Agreement will remain in effect until the Corrective Measures in Section II
are satisfied, as determined by the Director. The Agreement shall not terminate until the Director
confirms, in writing, that the Agreement is terminated in accordance with this paragraph. Nothing
in this Agreement prevents Respondent from completing any of the obligations earlier than the
deadlines provided for in this Agreement.
IX. Ratification:
31. The Parties’ undersigned representatives certify that they are fully authorized to
enter into the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to execute and legally bind such party
to this document.
32. The Parties hereby agree to all findings, conditions, and terms of this Agreement.
[Signature Lines on Following Page]



For Equitrans Midstream Corporation:
___________________________________
________________________
Date
For PHMSA:
________________________________________
Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety
________________________
Date



APPENDIX I:
DCVG PLAN
Condition 16 of the Agreement requires Respondent to conduct alternating current voltage gradient
(ACVG), direct current voltage gradient (DCVG), or other comparable inspection, testing, or
surveys capable of locating and assessing pipeline coating conditions indicative of potential
corrosion threats or anomalies, on certain pipeline segments prior to commissioning. Respondent
has developed a plan for conducting the surveys required by Condition 16, and that plan will
require Respondent to conduct a minimum of 14 DCVG surveys of varying lengths. Respondent
considered the following technical, logistical, and personnel safety considerations in selecting the
DCVG survey segments:
• Survey segments of adequate length to provide meaningful data that can be analyzed
quickly to determine where excavations for further investigations are required.
• Survey segments that predominantly coincide with the existing construction Spread
breaks. These Spread breaks also coincide with changes in the topography and similar
geologic conditions.
• Survey segment breaks where large installation gaps existed prior to 2023 construction
activities or at test segment break points. These break points ensure that additional welding
will not interfere with the testing or results conducted in those segments.
• Survey segments based on the availability of permanent cathodic protection groundbeds to
use as the anode source during testing.
• Survey sections based on the schedule for completing continuous pipe sections to minimize
the number of excavations that need to occur during winter months.
Respondent may divide the 14 survey segments described in Table 1 below into smaller sections
to facilitate coordination with other ongoing construction activities. If that occurs, Respondent
will still conduct the minimum number of excavations required under Condition 16 of the Consent
Agreement.
Table 1: Description of DCVG Survey Segments
Survey
Segment
#
Start
(MP)
End
(MP)
Segment
Length
(miles)
Pre-
2023
Pipe
(miles)
Start of
Survey
End of Survey
1 0 33.02 33.02 32.38 Start of Line End of Test
Section A4
2 33.02 76.19 43.17 41.79 Start of Test
Section B1
End of Test
Section B3
3 76.19 98.55 22.58 20.26 Start of Test
Section C1
End of Test
Section C6
4 98.62 118.28 19.66 17.65 Start of Test
Section D1
5 119.01 154.43 35.42 32.71 Gauley River
Crossing Area
Stallworth CS
6 154.45 167.33 12.88 12.56 GAS Gauley
River
Crossing Area
Stallworth CS End of Test
Section F1



7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
167.33 195.09 27.76 24.6 Start of Test
Section F2
201.65 219.55 17.9 14.5 Main Line
Valve 24
221.5 234.02 12.52 10.01 Start of Test
Section G2
234.38 241.41 7.03 2.18 245.9 253.95 8.05 6.67 GAS I-81
Crossing
GAS Bent
Mtn Area
253.95 270.9 16.95 13.62 Start of Test
Section I1
270.9 289.59 18.69 15.6 Start of Test
Section I4
289.59 303.36 14.61 11.25 Start of Test
Section I5
End of Test
Section F7
End of Test
Section G1
CIS I-81 Crossing
CIS Bent Mtn Area
End of Test
Section H6
End of Test
Section I3
End of Test
Section I4
End of Line

12023053NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_08112023_(23-264189)_text.pdf

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cbaker@equitransmidstream.com
August 11, 2023
Cliff Baker
Senior Vice President
Commercial Development & Operations
Equitrans Midstream Corporation
2200 Energy Drive,
Canonsburg, PA 15317
CPF No. 1-2023-053-NOPSO
Dear Mr. Baker:
Enclosed is a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice) issued in the above-referenced case. The
Notice proposes that you take certain measures with respect to your Mountain Valley Pipeline to
ensure pipeline safety. Your options for responding are set forth in the Notice. Your receipt of the
Notice constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
We look forward to a successful resolution to ensure pipeline safety. Please direct any questions on
this matter to me at 609-771-7809.
Sincerely,
Robert Burrough
Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Enclosures: Notice of Proposed Safety Order
49 C.F.R. § 190.239
Cc: Linda Daugherty, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, Office of Pipeline
Safety <linda.daugherty@dot.gov>
Keith Coyle, Esq. Babst Calland <kcoyle@babstcalland.com>
CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUESTED



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
EASTERN REGION
WEST TRENTON, NJ 08628
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
Equitrans Midstream Corporation, ) CPF No. 1-2023-053-NOPSO
)
Respondent )
____________________________________)
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SAFETY ORDER
Background and Purpose
This Notice of Proposed Safety Order (NOPSO or Notice) is being issued by the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), under the
authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60117. Pursuant to § 60117, PHMSA has initiated an investigation and
on-site inspections of the safety of Equitrans Midstream Corporation’s (ETRN) Mountain Valley
Pipeline, LLC in West Virginia and Virginia.
PHMSA’s ongoing investigation indicates that conditions may exist on ETRN’s Mountain Valley
Pipeline (MVP) facilities that pose a pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property, or the
environment. The conditions potentially exist on the MVP system and may present immediate risk
if the pipeline is commissioned without remediation.
1 Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117(m), PHMSA
is issuing this Notice to notify you of the preliminary findings of the investigation and propose you
take measures to ensure that the public, property, and the environment are protected from the
potential risks.
Preliminary Findings
A. General Preliminary Findings
• The MVP construction project encompasses the proposed and partially constructed MVP
interstate natural gas transmission system in its entirety, which will be comprised of
approximately 303 miles of 42-inch diameter coated steel pipe (Affected Facility). The
Affected Facility traverses the states of West Virginia and Virginia, commencing at mile
1 See, e.g., In the Matter of Occidental Chemical Corporation, PHMSA CPF No. 4-2011-5009S (June 28, 2011);
available online at:
https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/enforce/documents/420115009S/420115009S NOPSO 06282011.pdf.



post (MP) 0.0 in Wetzel County, West Virginia, and ending at MP 303.0 in Pittsylvania
County, Virginia, at the Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company’s (Transco) compressor
station (CS) 165. The Affected Facility also incorporates construction of three new
greenfield compressor stations located in Wetzel, Braxton, and Greenbrier Counties in
West Virginia. The MVP mainline will be constructed mainly of 42-inch diameter, ranging
from 0.500 to 0.888-inch thickness, X70M, Type SAWL pipe. The pipe was manufactured
by Welspun Corporation, Limited.
• The Affected Facility is an interstate natural gas pipeline that has been under construction
since 2018. The Affected Facility is mostly completed, except for a few miles of pipeline
yet to be installed in the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia and numerous water and
other crossings.
• The Affected Facility is subject to Federal pipeline safety laws and regulations, including
the natural gas pipeline design and construction safety regulations in 49 C.F.R. Part 192.
PHMSA has conducted pipeline construction safety oversight activities of MVP
construction project since 2018.
• The MVP construction project has been halted for long periods of time while pipe segments
have been buried without cathodic protection (CP) installed, and without other corrosion
control processes and inspections at different junctures.
2
• The construction delays have caused the coated steel pipe staged along the Affected
Facility right-of-way to be exposed to the elements and ultraviolet (UV) radiation for long
periods of time.3
• The Affected Facility traverses karst and mountainous topography, making the pipeline
environment susceptible to land movement.
• Recent PHMSA inspections of the Affected Facility in West Virginia and Virginia have
focused on all construction activity—in particular, pipe coating remediation and installed
CP systems. PHMSA has recently observed active CP systems in Spreads A and B of the
MVP construction project. CP installation in the remaining spreads are currently being
observed to evaluate their efficacy.
• During recent inspections of the Affected Facility, PHMSA has observed coating
remediation data and the documentation of coating inspections. Some data was being
recorded on an outdated form that does not represent current processes and procedures
governing such coating remediation work.
2 See January 23, 2020, letter from ETRN to FERC requesting to perform additional supplemental activities, Docket
No. CP16-10-000, Accession Number 20200123-5084; available online at:
https://elibrary ferc.gov/eLibrary/docinfo?accession number=20200123-5084.
3 Id. See infra note 14.



B. • Recent legislative, construction approval, and litigation-related developments unrelated to
PHMSA’s safety oversight authorities have taken place, which temporarily allowed ETRN
to resume construction activities on the MVP construction project.
4 While those activities
were delayed again,
5 recent developments indicate ETRN may imminently complete and
commission the Affected Facility.
6
• The identified risk conditions described further below are associated with external
corrosion control requirements prescribed under Part 192 (see, e.g., §§ 192.455 and
192.461). This NOPSO is intended to ensure an effective corrosion assessment and control
system is carried out. The details associated with each condition are listed below.
Cathodic Protection Systems Preliminary Findings
• The objective of cathodic protection is to mitigate pipeline corrosion, which can naturally
occur once steel pipe is buried. PHMSA requires operators to comply with § 192.455(a)(2)
by protecting pipeline facilities from corrosion during construction phases; monitoring for
conditions that could pose a threat to the integrity of the pipeline; and remediating
identified conditions, if necessary.
• ETRN provided PHMSA construction notification for the Affected Facility on January 3,
2018. During the construction and maintenance phases that have taken place since that
date, PHMSA has been conducting ongoing safety regulatory compliance activities to
ensure compliance with the relevant pipeline safety laws and regulations. Welding began
in Spread G on May 25, 2018, with additional construction activities initiating in multiple
spreads shortly thereafter. On October 15, 2019, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC)—the Federal agency responsible for authorizing gas pipeline
construction and operation activities in the U.S.—issued an order entitled “Cessation of
Certain Activities” in Docket No. CP16-10-000 (Cessation Order).
7 In the Cessation Order,
FERC ordered ETRN to cease all construction activity with the exception of restoration
and stabilization.
4 See Section 324 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub. L. No. 118-5, 137 Stat. 10 (June 2023). See also
June 28, 2023 FERC Order Authorizing All Construction Activities, Docket No. 16-10-000, Accession Number:
20230628-3041, available online at: https://elibrary ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession number=20230628-
3041&optimized=false.
5 See, e.g., Appalachian Voices v. Dep’t of the Interior, No. 23-1384 (4th Cir.).
6 See Supreme Court of the United States Order Vacating Stays, Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. Wilderness
Society, et al. (No. 23A35, July 27, 2023); available online at
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/072723zr_j4ek.pdf.
7 See October 15, 2019, FERC letter Cessation of Certain Activities, Docket No. CP16-10-000, Accession Number:
20191015-3030, available online at: https://elibrary ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession number=20191015-3030).
This followed an October 11, 2019, decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to grant a
stay of the November 2017 Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement for MVP (Wild Va. v. U.S. Dep’t of
the Interior, No. 19-1866 (4th Cir., Oct. 11, 2019)).



• When the Cessation Order was issued, MVP project construction was occurring in multiple
spreads throughout West Virginia and Virginia. Numerous pipeline segments of 42-inch
diameter pipe were installed in non-contiguous fashion, including many incomplete stream
crossings. This resulted in numerous pipeline segments that were essentially orphaned from
mechanical and electrical connection to MVP’s originally designed corrosion control
systems. By the fourth quarter of 2019, approximately 235 miles of pipe had been installed
and buried across nine construction spreads (spreads A thru I).
• ETRN reviewed CP test station readings along the Affected Facility in late 2019 and early
2020, noting the need for additional monitoring in areas where higher than expected
potential readings were observed during initial testing. ETRN reported to PHMSA that the
late 2019 and early 2020 readings revealed no areas that required immediate response.
• ETRN approached FERC in January of 2020 to address the Cessation Order, seeking
permission to perform additional activities, including slip repair and mitigation and the
installation of temporary cathodic protection on installed pipe segments.
8 ETRN’s request
discussed the potential corrosion concerns for the uncompleted pipeline at that time, noting
some segments would have been installed for more than two years prior to the pipeline
possibly being placed into operation.
• PHMSA, FERC, and ETRN had ongoing discussions thereafter pertinent to adequacy of
the CP system on the Affected Facility and mitigation efforts to be pursued in the event
right-of-way access and resumption of construction activities were further delayed. Results
of those meetings culminated with ETRN providing an MVP “Integrity Update” on July 8,
2020, referencing proactive approaches to CP and corrosion mitigation taken by ETRN
both prior to and after FERC’s issuance of the Cessation Order.
• Prior to March 2020, a corrosion specialist firm conducted three prior direct current voltage
gradient (DCVG9) coatings surveys on all continuous sections of pipe greater than three
miles in Spreads A and B. As of July 2020, approximately 38 miles of pipe had undergone
a coating survey and ETRN indicated the surveys resulted in coating remediation activities.
Results of the surveys indicated that further investigation would be required once
construction was resumed. In the interim, ETRN planned to continue surveying coating on
pipe segments greater than three miles in length and presently those surveys have
continued.
• According to ETRN, at present, 14 of 31 permanent ground bed CP systems have been
installed on the Affected Facility’s approximately 270 miles of buried pipe, of which
ETRN reports three are energized. In the case of pipe segments that are not cathodically
protected by the permanent ground bed CP systems, ETRN indicates it has installed 470
temporary CP “groundbed systems that are protecting the pipeline until these segments can
8 See supra note 2.
9 DCVG (direct current voltage gradient) is a survey technique used for assessing the effectiveness of corrosion
protection, particularly on buried steel structures.



be connected to permanent ground beds after Mountain Valley fills the construction
gaps.”10
• During PHMSA’s ongoing inspections of the Affected Facility, PHMSA discussed with
ETRN concerns that pipes installed without CP for extended periods of time could corrode.
Specifically, PHMSA underscored to ETRN the extent of corrosion that could potentially
exist in the absence of an effective CP system and emphasized the uncertainty that develops
once buried pipe is without effective CP (see PHMSA Advisory Bulletin (ADB) 03-06).11
PHMSA ADB 03-06 was issued after “the discovery of substantial external corrosion on a
newly constructed gas transmission pipeline. The pipeline had been in service a little over
two years when this unexpected corrosion was revealed by a high-resolution, inline
inspection tool. The pipe wall pitting was consistent with that caused by underground stray
electrical current before a cathodic protection system is installed.”12
• PHMSA acknowledges ETRN has taken several measures to address the cathodic
protection system deficiencies on the MVP construction project,13 but some buried pipeline
was installed without effective CP for periods of at least two years. This necessitates
extensive documentation of efforts to prevent corrosion and support the level of
effectiveness of the temporary CP systems, and how any potential corrosion has been
addressed to ensure compliance with safety standards.
• The MVP currently traverses one high consequence area (HCA) in a Class 3 location as
defined in Part 192, and will routinely be required to have an ILI tool run with assessments
within 10 years of commissioning. At present, ETRN indicated to PHMSA it is considering
conducting an in-line inspection (ILI) tool run with assessments in conjunction with
commissioning of the pipeline.
C. Protective Coating Preliminary Findings
• The MVP construction project has been subject to multiple construction delays. These
delays have resulted in the fusion bonded epoxy (FBE) coating on much of the pipe left
staged on the project right-of-way (ROW) exposed to potential maleffects (solar oxidation)
from the sun’s UV radiation.14 FBE coating on pipe is not intended to be left exposed to
10 See June 29, 2023, letter from ETRN to FERC addressing pipeline integrity concerns on MVP, Docket No. 16-10-
000, Accession Number 20230629-5164, available online at
https://elibrary ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession_number=20230629-5164.
11 68 Fed. Reg. 64,189 (Nov. 12, 2003). After discovery of substantial external corrosion on a newly constructed gas
transmission pipeline, PHMSA encouraged operators to have qualified corrosion personnel identify, mitigate, and
monitor any detrimental stray currents prior to and during construction.
12 Id.
13Supra note 10.
14 See, e.g., January 12, 2018, testimony of ETRN project manager Robert Cooper (Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC
v. Easements, et al., No. 7:17CV492 (W.D. Va.)), “[t]here are some other things that are kind of unique to this
project, one of which is the pipeline material. The pipeline is coated with a protective material. It's an epoxy. As it
sits in the sun, it ages or oxidizes and actually becomes thinner. And so we have to continue to monitor that and



UV radiation for extended periods of time prior to being buried.15 PHMSA is aware that in
some instances this exposure to environmental conditions—such as UV radiation and
adverse seasonal weather conditions—may have facilitated potential degradation of the
FBE coating on the MVP pipe. This degradation may have placed portions of pipe coating
below acceptable effective coating thresholds. ETRN’s present activities to test and
rehabilitate degraded coating indicate this risk condition exists.
• During recent inspections of the Affected Facility, PHMSA observed coating rehabilitation
activities and data, and the documentation of such. During an on-site inspection on July
12–13, 2023, in Spreads A and B, PHMSA staff reviewed records of coating analysis on
pipe with coating that was determined to not require remediation. This analysis was
recorded on the “Holiday Detector Inspection Form.” During the inspection, records for
pipe joint #J16009085D were assessed. The assessment was recorded on the Holiday
Detector Inspection Form, and the pipe coating was determined to not require remediation.
A single millage reading was required to be recorded on the Holiday Detector Inspection
Form; however, the process that ETRN has developed and implemented involves three
readings on five random locations for a joint of pipe.
• PHMSA has discussed the coating-related concerns described above with ETRN
throughout the delays in construction and has recently observed coating-related activities
along the MVP right-of-way and evaluated ETRN’s applicable procedures. PHMSA
understands ETRN has developed a process to assess and remediate potential coating
damage, which includes referencing applicable National Association of Corrosion
Engineers (NACE) standards and assessing the coating and remediating damage found,
potentially by applying additional coating on-site. The proposed corrective measures below
would require additional surveys of the pipe coating prior to commissioning and
independent third party review of the processes (and implementation of such) ETRN has
adopted to analyze and remediate any pipe coating damage, which will help resolve
potential integrity concerns.
D. Installation Preliminary Findings
• During its inspection of MVP Spread C, conducted from August 6–8, 2019, PHMSA
observed the placement of pipe within ditches off Mudlick Run Road and Camp Creek
Road in West Virginia was not performed in a manner consistent with ETRN’s procedures
prescribed by § 192.303.
• During the August 2019 PHMSA inspection at Mudlick Run Road, PHMSA observed a
42-inch diameter pipe was placed within a rock-laden trench without adequate support
padding and/or backfill material to protect the pipe coating from damage due to protruding
rocks and spoils within the trench. PHMSA observed that pipe installed at this location
may have been susceptible to stresses and/or damage that could result from movement or
settlement that is typical during required post-installation hydrostatic testing. Specifically,
inspect it. And prior to it becoming—there's some margin when you coat it, but prior to it becoming too thin to use,
you have to protect it from the sun.” Id. at 134.
15 See, e.g., National Association of Pipe Coating Applicators (NAPCA) Bulletin 12-78-04.



E. preparation of trench, padding height, and clear spacing requirements between rock and
pipe wall were inconsistent with the required minimum stipulated in ETRN’s 10.2
Standard, Sections 9.1, 14.1, 14.2 and 15.3. ETRN’s response to an inquiry by PHMSA
noted that the installation was a proposed tie-in location that was incomplete at the time of
inspection. ETRN subsequently remediated the identified condition at this location and
provided supporting evidence of such to PHMSA.
• At Camp Creek Road, PHMSA observed 42-inch diameter pipe being placed within a rock-
laden trench inconsistent with ETRN’s construction requirements. Specifically, clear
spacing requirements between pipe and rock wall, rock, and/or rock fragments were
inconsistent with the required minimum stipulated in ETRN’s 10.2 Standard, Sections 9.1,
14.1, 14.2 and 15.3. PHMSA observed that pipe installed at this location may be susceptible
to stresses and/or damage that may incur as a result of movement or settlement that is
typical during required post-installation hydrostatic testing.
• On April 14, 2020, PHMSA Eastern Region issued a Warning Letter to ETRN under CPF
No. 1-2020-1012W.16 The Warning Letter placed ETRN on notice regarding these pipe
installation issues for the remainder of the project. PHMSA’s concerns regarding
compliance with § 192.319 may be detrimental to pipeline integrity and be identified
during future pipe coating surveys and/or ILI caliper tool runs. The full inspections
proposed in the Corrective Measures below will ensure areas of potential integrity risk are
identified and remediated.
Land Movement and Strain Preliminary Findings
• The Affected Facility traverses areas of karst topography and steep slopes, making the
pipeline environment susceptible to land movement. Land movement has been a causal
factor in recent pipeline failures in the general vicinity of the route of the Affected
Facility.
17 Further, the Affected Facility axially traverses many steep hillside and valley
combinations that require sag bends and tie-in welds. Axial stresses on girth welds in sag-
bend and over-bend locations, and areas where tie-in welds may be susceptible to excessive
external stress during and/or soon after construction, have also been a causal factor in
recent pipeline failures in the general vicinity of the pipeline route.18 PHMSA has issued
advisory bulletins due to the prevalence of land movement issues affecting pipeline safety
in recent years to recommend operators take certain actions to prevent damage to pipeline
16https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/enforce/documents/120201012W/120201012W_Warning%20Letter_0
4142020.pdf. A warning letter was issued pursuant to PHMSA’s enforcement guidelines available online here:
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2020-
09/Section%203%20Selection%20of%20Administrative%20Enforcement%20Actions%20%20%289%2015%20202
0%29.pdf.
17 See, e.g., Leach XPress pipeline failure near Moundsville, West Virginia (June 7, 2018); See also PHMSA CPF
No. 1-2018-1016S; available online at
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/news/58376/columbia-gas-npso-july-2018.pdf.
18 See, e.g., Enterprise Products ATEX-1 pipeline failure near Follansbee, West Virginia (2015); Energy Transfer,
Rover Pipeline hydrotest near Wilbur, West Virginia (2018).



facilities caused by earth movement in variable, steep, and rugged terrain, and in terrain
varied or subject to changing subsurface geological conditions.19 Such circumstances
necessitate close attention to adopting assessment and mitigating measures, especially in
light of the extensive attention to land movement and slip mitigation issues that was
necessary as part of the MVP pipeline construction processes to date, and ETRN actions
taken to address subsidence along the right of way. The sag and ILI assessments in the
proposals below will assist in identifying and remediating any related conditions.
Proposed Issuance of Safety Order
Section 60117(m) of Title 49, United States Code, provides for the issuance of a safety order—
after reasonable notice and the opportunity for a hearing—requiring corrective measures, which
may include physical inspection, testing, repair, or other action, as appropriate. The basis for
making the determination that a pipeline facility has a condition or conditions that pose a pipeline
integrity risk to public safety, property, or the environment is set forth both in the above-referenced
statute and 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, a copy of which is enclosed.
After evaluating the foregoing preliminary findings of fact, and based on the unique aspects of the
MVP construction, including: (1) the amount of time that significant portions of the pipeline were
buried in the ground without being in operation or subject to corrosion prevention and inspection
requirements, and uncertainty of conditions that could develop or exist on the Affected Facility in
the absence of a timely and effective (and adequately documented) corrosion control program; (2)
the amount of time the pipe has been exposed to the environment and UV radiation, and the
uncertainty of conditions that could develop on the Affected Facility in the absence of adequate
coating remediation; (3) the potential existence of integrity issues due to observed installation
practices conveyed in previous PHMSA actions;20 (4) the steep topography the project traverses
and karst-related land movement risks; (5) the coating evaluation and remediation process issues
noted during recent PHMSA observations of on-site activities; as well as the hazardous nature of
the product transported to persons and the environment when operations commence and the
pressure required for transporting such product, the commissioning and operation of the MVP
pipeline without appropriate inspection and corresponding corrective measures first being
undertaken would pose a pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property, and the environment.
The conditions described above require a comprehensive evaluation to identify and remediate
integrity issues, mitigate the risk, and protect public safety, property, and the environment.21
19 See PHMSA advisory bulletins addressing “Potential for Damage to Pipeline Facilities Caused by Earth
Movement and Other Geological Hazards”; 84 Fed. Reg. 18,919 (May 2, 2019); 87 Fed. Reg. 33,576 (June 2, 2022).
20 See CPF No. 1-2020-1012W discussed in the Installation Preliminary Findings section above. See also PHMSA
CPF No. 1-2021-063-NOA, alleging ETRN had inadequate procedures under 49 C.F.R. § 192.303 as related to
coating and remediation-related issues; available online at
https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/enforce/documents/12021063NOA/12021063NOA_Notice%20of%20A
mendment_11182021_(20-172495)_text.pdf/.
21 See, e.g., In the Matter of Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, PHMSA CPF No. 1-2020-014-CAO (addressing
release of 169,000 cubic feet of natural gas that occurred during commissioning activities of a compressor station),
available online at
https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/enforce/documents/12020014CAO/12020014CAO_Amended%20Corre
ctive%20Action%20Order_10302020_(20-172418).pdf. See also, In the Matter of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners,



Accordingly, PHMSA issues this Notice to notify Respondent of the proposed issuance of a safety
order and to propose that Respondent take measures specified herein to address the potential risks.
Proposed Corrective Measures
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117(m) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, PHMSA proposes to issue a safety
order to ETRN incorporating the following remedial requirements with respect to the Affected
Facility:
1. (A) Definitions. For the purpose of this Notice, the following terms are defined as:
“Director” is the Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
(B) (C) “Effective Date” is the date a safety order is issued; and
“Affected Facility” means the approximately 303-mile MVP pipeline traversing the
states of West Virginia and Virginia, commencing at mile post (MP) 0.0 in Wetzel
County, West Virginia, and ending at MP 303.0 in Pittsylvania County, Virginia, and
includes all associated compressor stations and facilities.
2. Reports/Results. Within 15 days of completion of the required inspection, testing,
analysis, and/or surveys in Corrective Measures 4 through 7 below, ETRN must provide
the written results of the required inspection, testing, analysis and/or surveys to the
Director.
3. Remedial Work Plan. Within 30 days of completion of the required inspection, testing,
analysis, and/or surveys in Corrective Measures 4 through 7 below, ETRN must develop
and submit a written remedial work plan (Work Plan or RWP) to the Director that includes
the necessary corrective measures. The Plan must include provisions to:
(A) Remediate any identified safety conditions to include the specific remedial actions
described in Corrective Measures 4 through 7 below, including identification of
location and type of any necessary remediation activities;
(B) (C) (D) Include a proposed timeline for completion of the corrective measures;
Revise the Plan as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the
evaluations and associated remedial activities. Submit any such Plan revisions to the
Director for prior approval;
Accept the Director may approve Plan elements incrementally. Once approved, the
Plan shall become incorporated into the Safety Order; and,
LP, PHMSA CPF No. 2-2009-1024H (addressing gas pipeline failure that that occurred soon after pipeline
construction was completed); available online at
https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/enforce/documents/320091024H/320091024H_CAO_02172010.pdf.



(E) Implement the Plan as it is approved by the Director, including any revisions to the
Plan. Results of actions taken in accordance with the approved Plan must be available
for review by PHMSA or its representative.
4. Prior to commissioning, ETRN must conduct alternating current voltage gradient (ACVG),
direct current voltage gradient (DCVG), or other comparable inspection, testing, or surveys
capable of locating and assessing pipeline coating conditions indicative of potential
corrosion threats or anomalies, on all installed pipe segments except for those installed and
tested after January 1, 2023:
(A) A minimum of two (2) coating survey assessment classifications for survey
calibration must be excavated, classified, and/or remediated per each survey crew per
each time a survey is performed; and,
(B) Remediate any damaged coating indications found during the assessments required
in Condition 2 that are classified as:
i. Severe moderate (voltage (IR) drop greater than 60 percent for DCVG or 70 dBµV
for ACVG) (i.e., 35% IR and above for DCVG or 50 dBµV and above for ACVG),
or;
ii. Severe based on NACE International Standard Practice 0502-2010, “Pipeline
External Corrosion Direct Assessment Methodology,” (NACE SP 0502-2010).
5. Prior to installation, ETRN must conduct an analysis on all pipe that is intended to be
installed on the Affected Facility and that is currently stored on the MVP right-of-way
(including in the Bradley, West Virginia Yard, or at any other location outdoors) to assess
the level of any potential damage to the coating and to ensure the pipe is safe to be installed:
(A) The process used for the analysis must be evaluated by an independent third-party
approved by the Director in advance and with expertise and experience in assessing
the coating type being utilized on the Affected Facility, and must address and evaluate
coating performance to include adhesion tests. The third party shall audit the pipe
analysis and remediation processes at all spreads where rehabilitation activities are
conducted. The plan to conduct the analysis must also be approved by the Director;
and,
(B) As part of the RWP, ETRN must provide to the Director for approval a plan to
remediate (prior to installation), or to replace with new coated pipe segments, any
defective segments with damaged or defective coating identified during the analysis.
6. Within six months after commissioning, ETRN must assess the effectiveness of the
Affected Facility’s permanent CP system via a close interval survey (CIS) to ensure MVP’s
CP systems, including AC mitigation or interferences measures, are operating as designed
per National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) specified standards:
(A) The CIS must be conducted at a maximum 5-foot spacing and with interrupted on/off
current to meet the requirements in §§ 192.463 and 192.465; and
(B) ETRN must remediate any identified locations as necessary.



7. ILI/Tool Runs.
(A) (B) Within 90 days of commissioning of the Affected Facility, ETRN must run a high-
resolution caliper/deformation ILI tool with incorporated IMU capability, and
analyze areas on the Affected Facility susceptible to excessive external stresses,
including, but not limited, to all sag locations and tie-in welds.
22 Any identified
imperfection or damage shall be remediated per the requirements of § 192.309 and
run data retained for further analysis. The tools under this Corrective Measure 7 must
have the highest resolution presently available for sensor spacing and sampling rate,
and capability of multiple readings per sensor on the mechanical arm/sensor carrier
(e.g., capable of additional readings such as "stand-off" at the sensor carrier), with a
required sensitivity of measurements that enables repeatability in characterization
and prioritization based upon anomaly size. Preliminary and final analysis reports
shall be provided within 90 and 180 days of completion of the tool run, respectively.
The analysis of susceptible areas on the Affected Facility must commence
immediately following the Effective Date; and,
Within one year of the completion of the tool run in 7(A), ETRN shall run a high-
resolution ILI tool consisting of a longitudinal magnetic flux leakage (MFL) tool with
incorporated IMU and high-resolution caliper/deformation capabilities to assess for
and identify potential external and internal corrosion-related or other anomalies.
ETRN must perform a comparative stress/strain analysis (tensile and compressive)
utilizing the high-resolution deformation/caliper tool run data attained in 7(A) and
7(B) to more accurately identify potential areas of stress that may warrant further
investigation. If any segments of pipe are determined to be subject to excessive
external stress under this Corrective Measure 7(A)-(B), those segments must be
remediated under the RWP. ETRN will consult appropriate subject matter experts
and determine appropriate acceptable action levels for geohazards and other
conditions, as agreed upon by the Director. In the absence of an acceptable action
level determination as agreed upon with the Director, the default values of two (2)
percent strain for pipe and 0.5 percent strain for girth welds will be utilized. After
appropriate determination of the action levels, any identified locations above the
specified thresholds shall be remediated as required under Part 192.
8. 9. After receiving and analyzing additional data during this proceeding and implementation
of the Corrective Measures described above, the Director may identify other safety
measures that need to be taken on the Affected Facility. In that event, Respondent will be
notified of any proposed additional measures and, if necessary, amendments to the RWP
or safety order.
ETRN must submit quarterly reports to the Director that: (1) include available data and
results of the testing and evaluations required by the Safety Order; and (2) describe the
22 PHMSA acknowledges the availability of ILI tools may affect the exact timing of completion of this proposed
Corrective Measure 7. Requests for any time extensions based on documented tool availability concerns must be
approved by the Director as required under Corrective Measure 11 below.



progress of the repairs and other remedial actions being undertaken. The first quarterly
report shall be due 90 days from the date of the Safety Order.
10. A final summary report of work performed on the above items must be submitted to the
Director within 30 days of the completion of the last action performed by ETRN that is set
forth in the Safety Order.
11. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance with any of the terms of the
Safety Order upon a written request, timely submitted, demonstrating good cause for an
extension.
12. ETRN may appeal any decision of the Director to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline
Safety. Decisions of the Associate Administrator shall be final.
13. It is requested that ETRN maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs
associated with fulfilling this Safety Order and submit the total to the Director. It is
requested that these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with
preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies, and analyses; and 2) total cost associated
with replacements, additions, and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.
PHMSA believes that the above Corrective Measures will provide a level of safety equivalent to
that provided for in Part 192 and will ensure that ETRN performs inspections, testing, and surveys
necessary to identify any corrosion and other safety issues that may have taken place during the
delayed construction phase, and to ensure the integrity and safety of the pipeline.
The actions proposed by this Notice are in addition to and do not waive any requirements that
apply to Respondent’s facility under 49 C.F.R. Parts 190 through 199, under any other order issued
to Respondent under authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60101 et seq., or under any other provision of Federal
or state law.
Respondent may appeal any decision of the Director to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline
Safety. Decisions of the Associate Administrator shall be final.
Response to this Notice
In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, ETRN has 30 days following receipt of this Notice to
submit a written response to the official who issued the Notice. If ETRN does not respond within
30 days, this constitutes a waiver of ETRN’s right to contest this Notice and authorizes the
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further
notice to ETRN and to issue a safety order. In ETRN’s response, ETRN may notify that official
that it intends to comply with the terms of the Notice as proposed, or ETRN may request that an
informal consultation be scheduled. (ETRN will also have the opportunity to request an
administrative hearing before a safety order is issued.) Informal consultation provides ETRN with
the opportunity to explain the circumstances associated with the risk conditions alleged in the
notice and, as appropriate, to present a proposal for a work plan or other remedial measures,
without prejudice to ETRN’s position in any subsequent hearing.



If ETRN and PHMSA agree within 30 days of informal consultation on a plan and schedule for
you to address each identified risk condition, we may enter into a written consent agreement
(PHMSA would then issue an administrative consent order incorporating the terms of the
agreement). If a consent agreement is not reached, or if ETRN has elected not to request informal
consultation, ETRN may request an administrative hearing in writing within 30 days following
receipt of the Notice or within 10 days following the conclusion of an informal consultation that
did not result in a consent agreement, as applicable. Following a hearing, if the Associate
Administrator finds the facility to have a condition that poses a pipeline integrity risk to the public,
property, or the environment in accordance with § 190.239, the Associate Administrator may issue
a final safety order.
Be advised that all material ETRN submits in response to this enforcement action is subject to
being made publicly available. If ETRN believes that any portion of its responsive material
qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original
document ETRN must also provide a second copy of the document with the portions ETRN
believes qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why ETRN believes the
redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).
In ETRN’s correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF No. 1-2023-053-NOPSO for each
document it submits, and please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.
___________________________________ __________________
Robert Burrough Date issued
Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/12023053NOPSO>
- Source ID: `phmsa-enforcement`
- SHA-256: `642672c257cdd301f7c5ea144d7e47cb6bdc843c3b21b2f0771f1ab29926f54b`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T04:44:44.458Z
- Exported: 2026-08-22T05:37:22.026Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-enforcement-12023053nopso`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "cpf": "12023053NOPSO",
  "operator": "EQUITRANS MIDSTREAM CORPORATION",
  "region": "Eastern",
  "pipelineType": "INTERSTATE GAS TRANSMISSION",
  "caseStatus": "OPEN",
  "citedSections": [],
  "dataAsOf": "08/04/2026 12PM",
  "caseDataAsOf": "2026-08-04",
  "attachmentCount": 4,
  "attachments": [
    {
      "name": "12023053NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_10032023_(23-264189).pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_10032023_(23-264189).pdf",
      "bytes": 324156,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "12023053NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_10032023_(23-264189)_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_10032023_(23-264189)_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 247906,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "12023053NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_08112023_(23-264189).pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Safety%20Order_08112023_(23-264189).pdf",
      "bytes": 3475399,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "12023053NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_08112023_(23-264189)_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12023053NOPSO/12023053NOPSO_Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Safety%20Order_08112023_(23-264189)_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 306775,
      "category": "agency_document"
    }
  ],
  "extractedAgencyDocumentCount": 2,
  "attachmentPolicy": "Official attachment links are retained. Agency-issued documents may also include a verified local PDF and page-level text representation.",
  "jurisdiction": "US",
  "operatorName": "EQUITRANS MIDSTREAM CORPORATION"
}
```