# GULF SOUTH PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC — Warning Letter

**Citation:** CPF 420171007W  
**Type / status:** enforcement / historical  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2017-06-07

CLOSED warning letter citing 192.303, 192.461(a)(1), 192.461(a)(2).

## Document text

Warning Letter involving GULF SOUTH PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.303,  192.461(a)(1),  192.461(a)(2). The case was opened on 2017-06-07 and is reported as closed as of 2017-06-07. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

420171007W_Warning Letter_06072017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420171007W/420171007W_Warning%20Letter_06072017.pdf

420171007W_Warning Letter_06072017_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420171007W/420171007W_Warning%20Letter_06072017_text.pdf

420171007W_Warning Letter_06072017_text.pdf

WARNING LETTER
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
June 7, 2017
Mr. Richard Keyser
Senior Vice President of Operations
Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP
9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800
Houston, TX 77046
CPF-4-2017-1007W
Dear Mr. Keyser:
On May 17-18, 2017, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) inspected
your Coastal Bend Header Construction Project near milepost 9 in Wharton County, TX.
As a result of the inspection, it is alleged that you have committed probable violations of the
Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The items inspected
and the probable violations are:
1. §192.303 Compliance with specifications or standards
Each transmission line or main must be constructed in accordance with
comprehensive written specifications or standards that are consistent with this part.



§192.461 External corrosion control: Protective Coating.
Each external protective coating, whether conductive or insulating, applied for the
purpose of external corrosion control must –
(1) Be applied on a properly prepared surface;
(2) Have sufficient adhesion to the metal surface to effectively resist underfilm
migration of moisture;
Gulf South Pipeline failed to follow their written construction specification, #OP-CC-GS-COAT-
002, General Coating Specifications of Below Ground Facilities Addendum, 07/08/2014 as noted
below:
Gulf South Pipeline’s Coating Specification, Section 3.3 states:
“All metal surfaces, except those specifically exempted in these specifications, shall be
abrasive blast clean to a “Near White Blast Cleaning” in accordance with NACE 2 / SSPC-
SP 10 or better. Contractor shall use dry abrasive and compressed air that has been passed
through adequate water and oil traps. Any surface that has been blasted shall be coated the
same day. Abrasive blast shall result in a maximum surface profile as outlined in Table 7-
1 and Table 7-2.”
At the time of the inspection, the field joint surface preparation did not meet the Near White Blast
Cleaning requirement as specified in the operators’ Coating Specification of Below Ground
Facilities Section 3 Surface Preparation and Section 4.1 Surface Conditions, IBR NACE 2/SSPC-
SP 10 or better. According to NACE No. 2/SSPC-SP 10, Near-White Metal Blast Cleaning is
defined as “A near-white metal blast cleaned surface, when viewed without magnification, shall
be free of all visible: Oil, Rust, Grease, Coating, Oxides, Dirt, Dust, Mil Scale, Corrosion products
and Other foreign matter except for staining”. Visual inspection of the surface by PHMSA after
blasting showed that the surface had abrasive residue/dust that did not comply with the
NACE/SSPC joint surface preparation standards.
Gulf South Pipeline’s Coating Specification, Section 5.2 states:
“Unless otherwise approved by Company inspector, a Company inspector shall inspect all
prepared surfaces and previously coated areas and verify that the work meets coating
specifications before Contractor applies the first coat or additional coats. Drying time and
recoat schedule shall meet the manufacturer’s published recoat schedule.”
At the time of the inspection, the finished field joint coating revealed a low dry film thickness
(DFT) reading which was below the required film thickness stated in the operator’s coating
specification. The operator’s coating specification requires 22-30 mils of FBE on the mainline.
Actual DFT readings during the observation using a Type 1 DFT gauge revealed measurements
varying from 16 to 18 mils.
2



After the above findings were identified to Gulf South Pipeline by PHMSA, the operator re-blasted
and re-coated the field joint. The field joint coating thickness was verified again meeting the
operator’s coating specification. The changes were confirmed during a follow-up inspection on
May 18, 2017.
As of April 27, 2017, under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $209,002 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of
$2,090,022 for a related series of violations. Also, for LNG facilities, an additional penalty of not
more than $76,352 for each violation may be imposed. We have reviewed the circumstances and
supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional
enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the
item(s) identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP
being subject to additional enforcement action.
No reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to
CPF 4-2017-1007W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement
action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your
responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the
complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions
you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the
redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).
Sincerely,
Jon Manning, P.E.
Acting Director, Southwest Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
3

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420171007W>
- Source ID: `phmsa-enforcement`
- SHA-256: `13cdba245f0e8c6b75895eaa094e7e8f1f7708452959ee82fbaf4abc84136f68`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T04:44:44.458Z
- Exported: 2026-08-22T20:23:18.880Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-enforcement-420171007w`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "cpf": "420171007W",
  "operator": "GULF SOUTH PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC",
  "region": "Southwest",
  "pipelineType": "GAS INTERSTATE ONSHORE",
  "caseStatus": "CLOSED",
  "citedSections": [
    "192.303",
    "192.461(a)(1)",
    "192.461(a)(2)"
  ],
  "dataAsOf": "08/04/2026 12PM",
  "caseDataAsOf": "2026-08-04",
  "attachmentCount": 2,
  "attachments": [
    {
      "name": "420171007W_Warning Letter_06072017.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420171007W/420171007W_Warning%20Letter_06072017.pdf",
      "bytes": 54797,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "420171007W_Warning Letter_06072017_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420171007W/420171007W_Warning%20Letter_06072017_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 107656,
      "category": "agency_document"
    }
  ],
  "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": "GULF SOUTH PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC"
}
```
