# ENSTAR NATURAL GAS CO — Notice of Probable Violation

**Citation:** CPF 520040006  
**Type / status:** enforcement / historical  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2004-02-23

CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.199(h), 192.229, 192.233, 192.283(b)(7), 192.357(a), 192.479(a), 192.723(b)(1), 192.727(d).

## Document text

Notice of Probable Violation involving ENSTAR NATURAL GAS CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.199(h),  192.229,  192.233,  192.283(b)(7),  192.357(a),  192.479(a),  192.723(b)(1),  192.727(d). The case was opened on 2004-02-23 and is reported as closed as of 2006-06-15. Proposed civil penalty: $14,000. Assessed civil penalty: $8,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520040006_Final Order_06022006.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520040006/520040006_Final%20Order_06022006.pdf

520040006_final order_06022006_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520040006/520040006_final%20order_06022006_text.pdf

520040006_final order_06022006_text.pdf

U. S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline ana
HcuanloMs Malerials Safety
Aamlnlstratlon
400 Seventh Street, S. W.
Weshlngton, D. C. 20590
JUN -2 m6
Mr. Anthony Izzo, General Manager
Enstar Natural Gas Company
P. O. Box 190288
401 East International Airport Road
Anchorage, AK 99519-0288
RE: CPF No. 5-2004-0006
Dear Mr. Izzo,
Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in
the above-referenced case. It withdraws one of the allegations of violation, makes findings of
violation, acknowledges receipt of partial penalty payment and assesses a total civil penalty of
$8, 000 of which $3, 000 has already been paid by Respondent. The Final Order also finds that
you have completed the actions specified in the Notice required to comply with the pipeline
safety regulations, and that you have addressed the inadequacies in your procedures that were
cited in the Notice of Amendment. The penalty payment terms are set forth in the Final Order.
When the civil penalty is paid this enforcement action will be closed. Your receipt of the
Final Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C. F. R. $190. 5.
Sincerely,
James Reynolds
Pipeline Compliance Registry
Office of Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Chris Hoidal
Director, Western Region, OPS
Certified Mail Return-Recei t Re uested



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20590
In the Matter of
Enstar Natural Gas Company
Respondent.
CPF No. 5-2004-0006
FINAL ORDER
Between July 2 and 8, 2003, pursuant to 49 U. S. C. $60117, representatives of the Western
Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted onsite pipeline safety inspections of
Respondent's natural gas distribution facilities, manuals and records in Anchorage, Alaska As a
result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS, issued to Respondent, by letter dated
February 23, 2004, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, Proposed
Compliance Order, and Notice of Amendment (Notice).
In accordance with 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent committed
violations of 49 C. F. R. part 192, proposed assessing a civil penalty of $14, 000 for the alleged
violations, and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged
violations. The Notice also proposed, in accordance with 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 237, that Respondent
amend its Operating and Maintenance Procedures.
Respondent replied to the Notice by letter dated March 23, 2004 (Response). Respondent did
not contest Items 1, 6 and 7 in the Notice. Respondent provided information regarding the
corrective actions it has taken. Respondent performed a wire transfer in the amount of the
proposed civil penalties ($3, 000) for these Items. Respondent contested Items 5 and 8 in the
Notice, offered information in explanation of the allegations, provided information concerning
the corrective actions it has taken, and proposed that the civil penalties be eliminated.
Respondent provided additional information concerning compliance and amendment of its
procedures by letter dated April, 20 2004. Respondent formally requested a hearing by letter
dated May 14, 2004. The hearing was held on May 4, 2005, at the OPS, Western Region Alaska
District office in Anchorage, Alaska. After the hearing, Respondent submitted supporting
documents presented at the hearing and a summary of comments on May 18, 2005.



FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
Uncontested
Respondent did not contest the violations alleged in Notice Items 1, 6, and 7. Accordingly, I find
that Respondent violated the following sections of 49 C. F. R. Part 192, as more fully described in
the notice.
1) 49 C. F. R. $192. 199(h) — failing to secure the regulator station at the Fort
Richardson Laundry facility from unauthorized operation.
6) 49 C. F. R. $192. 479(a) — failing to take measures to prevent atmospheric
corrosion on susceptible above ground equipment in the regulator/relief
building at the East Anchorage regulator station and on the meter sets at the
Manoogs Isle Trailer Park and the Diamond Trailer Park in Anchorage.
7) 49 C. F. R. $192. 723 — failing at the time of inspection, to provide leak survey
records demonstrating that a leak survey had been conducted in the Anchorage
business district, grid 4 A1931BD, for the 2002 calendar year.
Contested
Item 5 alleged Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. $ 192. 357(a), which requires Respondent to install
customer meters and regulators so as to minimize anticipated stresses upon the connecting piping
and the meter or regulator. The Notice alleged that Respondent did not take steps to minimize
anticipated stresses when installing customer meter sets at some trailer parks. OPS personnel
observed that meter sets at the Manoogs Isle and Diamond Trailer Parks in Anchorage were only
supported by the riser pipe and that often, riser pipes were bent. Respondent reported that this
condition was common in older trailer parks and that in the Manoogs Isle and Diamond parks,
there were in excess of 1, 000 unsupported meter sets.
In Respondent's March 23, 2004 response, it agreed that these meter sets could be better
supported. Respondent further explained that it had not had any unusual problems with
regulators and meters failing as a result of the established method of installation. Respondent
noted that some of the risers have existed for up to 40 years and that OPS had inspected Enstar's
distribution system before and not objected to these conditions. After the July, 2003 OPS
inspection, Respondent initiated a program to refurbish and support the meter sets. Respondent's
post-hearing comments, submitted on May 18, 2005, document the straightening, support and
painting of 1144 trailer park meter sets. Respondent repaired the remaining 862 meter sets
during the summer of 2005.
In Respondent's post-hearing comments, it restated its position that its installation of meters
supported only by a riser pipe addresses all anticipated stresses as required by g 192. 357(a).
However, Respondent also noted its agreement with the OPS inspector that



the trailer court meter sets needed to be straightened, painted and their appearance generally
liIlproved.
Section 192. 357(a) requires that meters are adequately supported at all times. Inadequately
supported meters are more susceptible to damage and present an increased threat to public safety,
Here, many of the riser pipes supporting Respondents meter sets were bent. This condition
indicates a lack of proper support and is the type of unsafe situation that the regulation was
designed to avoid. Respondent's assertion that it has never had a meter fail as a result of
improper support does not negate this finding. Additionally, PHMSA is not precluded from
taking enforcement action for a violation that was not identified during previous inspections.
Therefore, I find that Respondent committed violation of $192. 357(a).
This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action
taken against Respondent.
WITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATION
Notice Item 8 alleged that Respondent had violated 49 C. F. R. $ 192. 727(d), by failing to
properly abandon its customer meter sets. When taking certain customer meter sets out of
service, Respondent installed a locking device on the shut-off valve as the lone method of
compliance with $192. 727. In the Notice, OPS asserted that when a customer service meter is
physically removed, in addition to locking the device, both ends of the piping must be sealed. In
its response, Respondent asserted, that only one of those abandonment methods need be used in
order to comply with the $192. 727. I agree with Respondent. As a result, I am withdrawing this
allegation of violation.
ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY
Under 49 U. S. C. $60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed
$100, 000 per violation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of $1, 000, 000 for any
related series of violations.
49 U. S. C. f 60122 and 49 C. F. R. ) 190. 225 require that, in determining the amount of the civil
penalty, I consider the following criteria: nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,
degree of Respondent's culpability, history of Respondent's prior offenses, Respondent's ability
to pay the penalty, good faith by Respondent in attempting to achieve compliance, the effect on
Respondent's ability to continue in business, and such other matters as justice may require.
Item 1 proposed a civil penalty of $1, 000 for violation of $192. 199(h). Respondent did not
contest this item and paid the civil penalty in response to the Notice. Accordingly, having
reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of
$1, 000, already paid by Respondent.
' Respondeat's letter, May 18, 2005, page 1.



Item 5 proposed a civil penalty of $10, 000 for violation of 49 C. F. R. $192. 357(a), for not taking
steps to minimize stresses on customer meter connecting piping. The proper support of customer
meters and connecting piping is an important public safety requirement. Respondent should
have realized that bent riser pipes on many of its customer meter sets indicated insufficient
support. This condition threatened public safety and is the type of situation $192. 357(a) was
designed to prevent.
Respondent maintained that its program to fully support all meters in question demonstrated
good faith in achieving compliance. Subsequent compliance does not negate past violation.
Nonetheless, the circumstances surrounding the violation allow for mitigation of the proposed
civil penalty. Part 192. 357(a) is broadly worded and demands only "support" of meters, without
specifying the nature of that support. After 40 years of installing meters only supported by the
riser pipe, it is possible that Respondent was acting on a good faith belief that it had satisfied the
regulatory requirements. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment
criteria, I assess Respondent a reduced total civil penalty of $5, 000.
Item 6 proposed a civil penalty of $1, 000 for violation of $192. 479(a). Respondent did not
contest this item and paid the civil penalty in response to the Notice. Accordingly, having
reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of
$1, 000, already paid by respondent.
Item 7 proposed a civil penalty of $1, 000 for violation of $192. 723. Respondent did not contest
this item and paid the civil penalty in response to the Notice. Accordingly, having reviewed the
record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $1, 000,
already paid by respondent.
Item 8 proposed a civil penalty of $1, 000. Since this item is withdrawn, the proposed civil
penalty is not assessed.
Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess
Respondent a total civil penalty of $8, 000 of which $3, 000 has already been paid by Respondent.
Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Payment may be made by
sending a certified check or money order (containing the CPF Number for this case) payable to
"U. S. Department of Transportation" to the Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney
Aeronautical Center, Financial Operations Division (AMZ-300), P. O. Box 25082, Oklahoma
City, OK 73125. '
Federal regulations (49 C. F, R. $ 89. 21(b)(3)) also permit this payment to be made by wire
tnmsfer, through the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the
U. S. Treasury. Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire
transfers should be directed to: Financial Operations Division (AMZ-300), Federal Aviation
Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, P. O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK
73125; (405) 954-8893,



Failure to pay the $5, 000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate
in accordance with 31 U. S. C. $ 3717, 31 C. F. R. $ 901. 9 and 49 C. F. R. $ 89. 23. Pursuant to
those same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6'/o) per annum will be charged if
payment is not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty
may result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a United
States District Court
Under 49 C. F. R. f 190. 215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of
this Final Order. The petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent's receipt of this
Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The filing of the petition
automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. However if Respondent submits
payment for the civil penalty, the Final Order becomes the final administrative decision and the
right to petition for reconsideration is waived. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are
effective on receipt.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Notice items 1, 5, 6 and 7. Under 49
U. S. C. $ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of gas or who owns or
operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established
under chapter 601. The Regional Director has indicated that Respondent has taken the following
actions specified in the proposed Compliance Order to address the cited violations:
For Item 1 (violation of 49 C. F. R. $192. 199), Respondent has secured the regulator station to
protect it &om unauthorized operation
For Item 5 (violation of 49 C. F. R. $192. 357), Respondent has provided adequate meter support
to the meter sets to prevent stresses on the connecting piping.
For Item 6 (violation of 49 C. F. R. $192. 479), Respondent has coated exposed bolts within the
regulator relief building and numerous meter sets with a material suitable for the prevention of
atmospheric corrosion.
For Item 7 (violation of 49 C. F. R. $192. 723), Respondent has provided leak survey reports for
2003 and 2004 that confirm completion of the surveys.
These actions comply with the requirements in Items 1, 5, 6 and 7 of this Order. Accordingly,
since compliance has been achieved with respect to these violations, compliance terms are not
included in this Order.
AMENDMENT OF PROC DURES
Notice Items 2, 3, and 4 alleged that certain portions of Respondent's Operating Procedures were
inadequate and proposed to require amendment of Respondent's procedures. In its response,
Respondent submitted copies of its amended procedures,



which the Director, Western Region, OPS reviewed. Accordingly, based on the results of this
review, I find that Respondent's original procedures as described in the Notice were inadequate
to ensure safe operation of its pipeline system, but that Respondent has corrected the identified
inadequacies. No need exists to issue an order directing amendment.
JUN -2 m6
S
As o
for
L Gerard
iate Administrator
ipeline Safety
Date Issued

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520040006>
- Source ID: `phmsa-enforcement`
- SHA-256: `b57cf669e7eba2d98c0286095cbdded3a1caafffa078f4ed5abd35b5dc4d0089`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T04:44:44.458Z
- Exported: 2026-08-23T00:28:23.089Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-enforcement-520040006`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "cpf": "520040006",
  "operator": "ENSTAR NATURAL GAS CO",
  "region": "Western",
  "pipelineType": "GAS INTRASTATE ONSHORE",
  "caseStatus": "CLOSED",
  "citedSections": [
    "192.199(h)",
    "192.229",
    "192.233",
    "192.283(b)(7)",
    "192.357(a)",
    "192.479(a)",
    "192.723(b)(1)",
    "192.727(d)"
  ],
  "dataAsOf": "08/04/2026 12PM",
  "caseDataAsOf": "2026-08-04",
  "attachmentCount": 2,
  "attachments": [
    {
      "name": "520040006_Final Order_06022006.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520040006/520040006_Final%20Order_06022006.pdf",
      "bytes": 107831,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520040006_final order_06022006_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520040006/520040006_final%20order_06022006_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 374243,
      "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": "ENSTAR NATURAL GAS CO"
}
```