# NATURAL GAS PIPELINE CO OF AMERICA (KMI) — Notice of Probable Violation

**Citation:** CPF 320151002  
**Type / status:** enforcement / historical  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2015-04-30

CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.933(d)(1)(ii).

## Document text

Notice of Probable Violation involving NATURAL GAS PIPELINE CO OF AMERICA (KMI). PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.933(d)(1)(ii). The case was opened on 2015-04-30 and is reported as closed as of 2017-03-30. Proposed civil penalty: $47,500. Assessed civil penalty: $0. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

320151002_Final Order_03302017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Final%20Order_03302017.pdf

320151002_Final Order_03302017_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Final%20Order_03302017_text.pdf

320151002_NOPV PCP_04302015.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_NOPV%20PCP_04302015.pdf

320151002_NOPV PCP_04302015_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_NOPV%20PCP_04302015_text.pdf

320151002_Operator Post-Hearing Submission - Brief_04082016.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Operator%20Post-Hearing%20Submission%20-%20Brief_04082016.pdf

320151002_Operator Response to Notice and Requests Hearing_05292015.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice%20and%20Requests%20Hearing_05292015.pdf

320151002_Final Order_03302017_text.pdf

March 30, 2017
Mr. David Devine
President and Chief Executive Officer
Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC
1001 Louisiana Street
Houston, TX 77002
Re: CPF No. 3-2015-1002
Dear Mr. Devine:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It withdraws the
allegation of violation that was included in the Notice of Probable Violation issued April 30,
2015. This enforcement action is now closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is
effective 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
cc: Mr. Allan Beshore, Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Ms. Jessica Toll, Assistant General Counsel, Kinder Morgan
370 Van Gordon St., Lakewood, CO 80228
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED



CPF No. 3-2015-1002
Page 2
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
In the Matter of )
)
)
Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, Inc., )
)
Respondent. )
___________________________________ )
) CPF No. 3-2015-1002
FINAL ORDER
On August 20-22 and November 5-7, 2013, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of
the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety
(OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Natural
Gas Pipeline Company of America (NGPL or Respondent) in Joilet, Illinois. NGPL, a
subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, Inc., operates approximately 9,200 miles of pipeline transporting
natural gas in the South and Midwest.1
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,
by letter dated April 30, 2015, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty
(Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that NGPL had
violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.933(d)(1)(ii) and proposed a civil penalty of $47,500.
NGPL responded to the Notice by letter dated May 29, 2015, contested the allegation, and
requested a hearing. NGPL submitted a pre-hearing brief on February 22, 2016 (Brief). In
accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.211, a hearing was held in Kansas City, Missouri on March 3,
2016, before a Presiding Official from the Office of Chief Counsel, PHMSA. After the hearing,
Respondent submitted additional written materials dated April 8, 2016, and August 9, 2016.
Pursuant to § 190.209(b)(7), the Director submitted a written evaluation of Respondent’s
response material on July 12, 2016.
1 This information is reported by Respondent for calendar year 2015 pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 191.17.



CPF No. 3-2015-1002
Page 3
WITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATION
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.933(d)(1)(ii), as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.933(d)(1)(ii), which states
in relevant part:
§ 192.933 What actions must be taken to address integrity issues?
(a) General requirements. An operator must take prompt action to
address all anomalous conditions the operator discovers through the
integrity assessment. In addressing all conditions, an operator must
evaluate all anomalous conditions and remediate those that could reduce a
pipeline's integrity . . . .
(b) Discovery of condition. Discovery of a condition occurs when an
operator has adequate information about a condition to determine that the
condition presents a potential threat to the integrity of the pipeline. A
condition that presents a potential threat includes, but is not limited to,
those conditions that require remediation or monitoring listed under
paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) of this section. An operator must
promptly, but no later than 180 days after conducting an integrity
assessment, obtain sufficient information about a condition to make that
determination, unless the operator demonstrates that the 180-day period is
impracticable.
(c) Schedule for evaluation and remediation. An operator must
complete remediation of a condition according to a schedule prioritizing
the conditions for evaluation and remediation . . . .
(d) Special requirements for scheduling remediation—(1) Immediate
repair conditions. An operator’s evaluation and remediation schedule
must follow ASME/ANSI B31.8S, section 7 in providing for immediate
repair conditions. To maintain safety, an operator must temporarily reduce
operating pressure in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section or shut
down the pipeline until the operator completes the repair of these
conditions. An operator must treat the following conditions as immediate
repair conditions . . .
(ii) A dent that has any indication of metal loss, cracking or a stress
riser.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.933(d)(1)(ii) by failing to
temporarily reduce operating pressure after receiving information of six pipeline dents with
metal loss, which are classified by the regulation as “immediate repair conditions.” Specifically,
the Notice alleged that NGPL received a tool vendor final report on May 6, 2010, for an inline
inspection (ILI) assessment of a pipeline segment from Compressor Station 13 to Brainard Road
and the report identified six immediate repair conditions. The Notice alleged that Respondent
did not temporarily reduce pressure on the pipeline until May 13, 2010, seven days after the
conditions were discovered.



CPF No. 3-2015-1002
Page 4
In its written submissions and at the hearing, Respondent argued that it did not have adequate
information to discover the immediate repair conditions on May 6, 2010. Pursuant to
§ 192.933(b), Respondent contended, “discovery” of an immediate repair condition occurs when
an operator has adequate information about a condition to determine that it presents a potential
integrity threat. Respondent explained that it discovered the immediate conditions on May 13,
2010, after the Company had aligned “the data from the ILI vendor’s Final Report with existing
company data, including data on the locations of HCAs [high consequence areas] and prior
repairs.”2 Within two business hours of completing the alignment, Respondent discovered the
conditions and initiated and completed a pressure reduction.
Respondent explained that until it had completed alignment of the data, it did not have adequate
information to determine if immediate repair conditions were present. In particular, Respondent
claimed that the ILI vendor’s final report did not provide adequate information on its own,
because it did not indicate whether the dents with metal loss were located in HCAs or whether
they had been previously evaluated and repaired. Respondent stated that its data alignment
process was necessary in order to: (1) establish the location of each anomaly; (2) determine if the
location was within an HCA; and (3) determine whether an anomaly had previously been
evaluated or repaired.3
At the hearing, OPS argued that Respondent discovered the immediate conditions on May 6,
2010, when the Company received the ILI vendor’s final report that identified dents with metal
loss. The report included latitude and longitude coordinates, as well as above ground markers
that had been placed along the pipeline for the ILI tool run. OPS claimed this information was
enough for Respondent to cross index the location of the dents with HCAs on other maps to
determine an immediate pressure reduction was required.
Analysis
Section 192.933(d) requires a pipeline operator to temporarily reduce pressure or shut down a
pipeline upon discovery of an immediate repair condition, including any dent with metal loss.
Discovery of a condition occurs when an operator has “adequate information about a condition to
determine that the condition presents a potential threat to the integrity of the pipeline.”4
Discovery is not tied “solely to the date of the tool run but to the fact that at the completion of a
tool run there are assessment results from which an operator can obtain sufficient information
about the condition to determine that condition presents a potential threat to the integrity of the
pipeline.”5
PHMSA has found that “the type of information contained in a vendor report is generally
sufficient to enable the operator to determine whether there are immediate repair conditions on
2 Brief at 2.
3 Brief at 7-8.
4 49 C.F.R. § 192.933(b).
5 BP Pipelines (North America), Inc., Decision on Petition for Reconsideration, CPF No. 3-2005-5030, at
6, 2006 WL 7129217 (Sept. 6, 2006).



CPF No. 3-2015-1002
Page 5
the pipeline.”6 An operator, therefore, will normally have sufficient information to enable
discovery of an immediate repair condition upon receipt of the vendor’s report. PHMSA has
also acknowledged, however, “there may be specific instances when discovery is delayed in
order for an operator to gather and integrate additional information from other sources.”7 In
those instances “discovery sometimes requires the gathering and integration of information from
other sources,” but an operator must be able to demonstrate there was a need to gather and
integrate information from sources other than the ILI reports.8
Having reviewed the evidence in the record, I find adequate support for Respondent’s argument
that the ILI report did not provide enough data on its own and that integration of additional
information was necessary to determine if conditions presented a potential threat to the integrity
of the pipeline. Specifically, Respondent demonstrated that integration of information was
necessary to determine if the conditions were in fact located in an HCA and were not previously
repaired. While OPS argued this information could have been determined more quickly based
on above-ground markers, Respondent explained at the hearing why the above-ground markers
were only intended to be used for the pig run and were not accurate enough to be used for HCA
identification.9 In addition, I note that Respondent completed its data integration, declared
discovery of the conditions, and implemented a pressure reduction only 70 days into the 180-day
regulatory deadline for discovering conditions following an assessment.
Accordingly, after considering the record, I find there is insufficient evidence in the record to
prove Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.933(d)(1)(ii) in the manner alleged by the Notice.
This allegation is therefore withdrawn and the proposed penalty is not assessed. The terms and
conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
March 30, 2017
___________________________________ _________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
(Aug.
6 Sunoco Pipeline L.P., Order Directing Amendment, CPF No. 4-2007-5007M, at 3, 2009 WL 5538651
(Dec. 1, 2009); Magellan Pipeline Co., Final Order, CPF No. 4-2004-5006, at 1-2, 2005 WL 6956543 18, 2005).
7 Sunoco Pipeline L.P., CPF No. 4-2007-5007M, at 3.
8 ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Co., Final Order, CPF No. 4-2005-5037, at 4, 2007 WL 1202565 (Jan. 9,
2007).
9 Transcript at 65.

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320151002>
- Source ID: `phmsa-enforcement`
- SHA-256: `8b9941d06640ec37b839fcae07039a5a198421a17317748070e89dc49edf0cac`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T04:44:44.458Z
- Exported: 2026-08-23T09:07:36.003Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-enforcement-320151002`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "cpf": "320151002",
  "operator": "NATURAL GAS PIPELINE CO OF AMERICA (KMI)",
  "region": "Central",
  "pipelineType": "GAS INTERSTATE ONSHORE",
  "caseStatus": "CLOSED",
  "citedSections": [
    "192.933(d)(1)(ii)"
  ],
  "dataAsOf": "08/04/2026 12PM",
  "caseDataAsOf": "2026-08-04",
  "attachmentCount": 6,
  "attachments": [
    {
      "name": "320151002_Final Order_03302017.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Final%20Order_03302017.pdf",
      "bytes": 1393590,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "320151002_Final Order_03302017_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Final%20Order_03302017_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 97014,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "320151002_NOPV PCP_04302015.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_NOPV%20PCP_04302015.pdf",
      "bytes": 253079,
      "category": "case_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "320151002_NOPV PCP_04302015_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_NOPV%20PCP_04302015_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 14621,
      "category": "case_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "320151002_Operator Post-Hearing Submission - Brief_04082016.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Operator%20Post-Hearing%20Submission%20-%20Brief_04082016.pdf",
      "bytes": 502347,
      "category": "party_submission"
    },
    {
      "name": "320151002_Operator Response to Notice and Requests Hearing_05292015.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320151002/320151002_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice%20and%20Requests%20Hearing_05292015.pdf",
      "bytes": 1103576,
      "category": "party_submission"
    }
  ],
  "extractedAgencyDocumentCount": 1,
  "attachmentPolicy": "Official attachment links are retained. Agency-issued documents may also include a verified local PDF and page-level text representation.",
  "jurisdiction": "US",
  "operatorName": "NATURAL GAS PIPELINE CO OF AMERICA (KMI)"
}
```
