# NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH ENERGY MANAGEMENT — Notice of Probable Violation

**Citation:** CPF 520200010  
**Type / status:** enforcement / historical  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2020-11-18

CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.203(b)(9), 192.465(d), 192.467(a), 192.467(d), 192.479(a), 192.481(a), 192.481(b), 192.614(c)(1), 192.616(c), 192.616(d)(3), 192.707(c), 192.739(a), 192.743(a), 192.807(b).

## Document text

Notice of Probable Violation involving NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH ENERGY MANAGEMENT. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.203(b)(9),  192.465(d),  192.467(a),  192.467(d),  192.479(a),  192.481(a),  192.481(b),  192.614(c)(1),  192.616(c),  192.616(d)(3),  192.707(c),  192.739(a),  192.743(a),  192.807(b). The case was opened on 2020-11-18 and is reported as closed as of 2023-11-16. Proposed civil penalty: $151,900. Assessed civil penalty: $151,900. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520200010_Closure Letter_11162023_(19-166675S).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Closure%20Letter_11162023_(19-166675S).pdf

520200010_Closure Letter_11162023_(19-166675S)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Closure%20Letter_11162023_(19-166675S)_text.pdf

520200010_Final Order_06152021_(19-166675S).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Final%20Order_06152021_(19-166675S).pdf

520200010_Final Order_06152021_(19-166675S)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Final%20Order_06152021_(19-166675S)_text.pdf

520200010_NOPV PCP PCO_11182020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_11182020.pdf

520200010_NOPV PCP PCO_11182020_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_11182020_text.pdf

520200010_Operator Response to Notice_12022020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_12022020.pdf

520200010_Closure Letter_11162023_(19-166675S)_text.pdf

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: Josiah.Patkotak@north-slope.org
November 16, 2023
The Honorable Josiah Patkotak
Mayor of the North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough Energy Management
P.O. Box 69
Utqiagvik, Alaska 99723
CPF 5-2020-0010
Closure Letter
Dear Mayor Patkotak:
On June 15, 2021, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued
to the North Slope Borough a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This Order included
Compliance Order and Civil Penalty assessment. Based on our review of the documentation you
provided and confirmation of payment of the civil penalty, it has been determined that you have
complied with the terms of this Order.
Accordingly, this case is now closed, and no further action is contemplated with respect to the
matters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Dustin Hubbard
Director, Western Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
cc: PHP-60 Compliance Order
PHP-500 J. Gano (#19-166675S)
Scott Danner, Director of NSB Department of Public Works (via email),
Scott.Danner@north-slope.org

520200010_NOPV PCP PCO_11182020_text.pdf

NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION
PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY
and
PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
VIA E-MAIL TO THE HONORABLE HARRY K. BROWER, JR.
November 18, 2020
The Honorable Harry K. Brower, Jr., Mayor
Mayor of the North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough Energy Management
P.O. Box 69
Utqiagvik, Alaska 99723
CPF 5-2020-0010
Dear Mayor Brower:
From December 9 through 13, 2019, and on March 10, 2020, representatives of the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), pursuant
to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), inspected your Barrow natural gas pipeline
located in Utqiagvik and Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline in the North Slope Borough, Alaska.
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. § 192.203 Instrument, control, and sampling pipe and components.
(a) .…
(b) Materials and design. All materials employed for pipe and components must be
designed to meet the particular conditions of service and the following:
(1) ….
(9) Each control line must be protected from anticipated causes of damage and
must be designed and installed to prevent damage to any one control line from
making both the regulator and the over-pressure protective device inoperative.
On the Barrow natural gas pipeline, the control line between the Primary Gas Handling Facility
and Pipeline Valve Station 1 is not protected from anticipated causes of damage as required by §
192.203(b)(9).
Four pressure control valves (PCV214A, PCV214B, PCV237A, and PCV237B) at the Primary
Gas Handling Facility (PGHF) reduce the pressure from the upstream gathering system
(approximately 900 psig) to the pipeline's normal operating pressure (approximately 290
psig). These pressure control valves share a common stainless steel sensing/control line, which
is located on a pipe rack between the PGHF and Pipeline Valve Station 1. The sensing/control
line is located outside and shares pipe supports with nearby piping. The sensing line may be
damaged by sloughing snow or ice from the adjacent pipes, particularly mid-point of the span
between pipe supports. Failure of this sensing line would cause the four pressure control valves
to all simultaneously open which could potentially overpressure the pipeline.
2. § 192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) .…
(d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any deficiencies
indicated by the monitoring.
North Slope Borough Energy Management (NSBEM) failed to take prompt remedial action to
correct deficiencies found during their 2017, 2018, and 2019 cathodic protection (CP)
monitoring of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline. CP inspections completed in 2017, 2018, and
2019 found locations along the buried portion of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline that did not
meet one or more applicable criteria contained in appendix D of part 192.
In 2017, NSBEM conducted a survey of the CP levels at each test station. Test Stations 2, 4, and
7 did not meet CP criteria. NSBEM was cited by PHMSA in a 2013 Warning Letter (5-2013-
0008W) for failing to maintain the required level of cathodic protection on the Nuiqsut natural
gas pipeline. That letter states that NSBEM had reports showing, as far back as 2011, that CP
potentials at Test Stations 2, 4, and 7 were inadequate.
In both 2018 and 2019, NSBEM conducted close-interval surveys and test station point surveys
of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline. The close interval surveys demonstrated that the majority of
the pipeline did not meet applicable CP criteria in 2018, and approximately 23 percent of the
pipeline did not meet applicable CP criteria in 2019. Portions of the pipeline between Test
2



Stations 1 and 2, between Test Stations 2 and 3, and between Test Stations 3 and 4, failed to
meet CP criteria in both the 2018 and 2019 close-interval surveys.
Despite records showing inadequate CP potentials were found during monitoring, including
locations that had inadequate CP potentials for multiple consecutive years, NSBEM has not
taken any remedial measures to ensure the pipeline meets the CP criteria specified in appendix D
of part 192.
3. § 192.467 External corrosion control: Electrical isolation.
(a) Each buried or submerged pipeline must be electrically isolated from other
underground metallic structures, unless the pipeline and the other structures are
electrically interconnected and cathodically protected as a single unit.
The buried segment of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline was not electrically isolated from other
underground metallic structures and was not electrically interconnected with those structures and
cathodically protected as a single unit. Cathodic protection inspection reports completed in 2017,
2018, and 2019 noted that a bare copper wire was bonded to the Nuiqsut transmission pipeline,
which bypassed the di-electric isolation flange kit at the pressure reducing valve (PRV) at the
downstream end of the pipeline, shorting the pipeline to the PRV's grounding system. The PRV
skid and the pipeline are not electrically interconnected and cathodically protected as a single
unit. The operator removed the grounding wire during the March 10, 2020 site inspection, but
could not verify that the pipeline was isolated from PRV facility piping.
4. § 192.467 External corrosion control: Electrical isolation.
(a) .…
adequate.
(d) Inspection and electrical tests must be made to assure that electrical isolation is
NSBEM failed to make inspections and electrical tests to assure that electrical isolation is
adequate at the upstream end of the buried segment of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline. During
the March 10, 2020 inspection, PHMSA observed potential lack of isolation between the pipeline
and the buried, bare steel vertical support members (VSMs) which support the above ground
pipeline. The VSMs were not intended to be electrically interconnected with the pipeline and
protected as a single unit. Specifically, PHMSA observed that the pipeline is not equipped with
an insulating device (for example a dielectric insulating flange) to electrically isolate the buried
segment from the above-ground segment. The above-ground segment was braced to bare steel
horizontal support members (HSMs) and VSMs using steel U-bolts. In addition, the Nuiqsut
pipeline was supported between the HSMs by steel brackets that were connected via U-bolts to
the pipeline and three other neighboring pipelines that did not appear to be isolated from the
VSMs. This above-ground segment has historically had coating failures and may be electrically
continuous with the bare steel vertical support members.
3



NSBEM was unable to demonstrate that an inspection and electrical test had occurred at this
location and that the electrical isolation was adequate. The NSBEM conducts isolation
inspecting and testing annually at other locations on this pipeline, the results of which are
presented in the cathodic protection monitoring reports. The reports do not include testing at the
upstream end of the buried segment. The reports do show that test stations near this end of the
pipeline have not consistently met cathodic protection criteria, indicating isolation may be
necessary to facilitate the application of corrosion control.
5. § 192.479 Atmospheric corrosion control: General.
(a) Each operator must clean and coat each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is
exposed to the atmosphere, except pipelines under paragraph (c) of this section.
The operator did not clean and coat each portion of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline that was
exposed to the atmosphere as required by § 192.479(a), nor did they meet the exceptions to the
requirement to do so under paragraph § 192.479(c). Between 2010 and 2018, the Nuiqsut natural
gas pipeline operated without adequate atmospheric corrosion control coating and with corrosion
present that was beyond that of a light surface oxide. In addition, the operator failed to
demonstrate that the corrosion would not affect the safe operation of the pipeline before the next
scheduled inspection per § 192.479(c)(2).
In 2013, PHMSA cited the operator for failing to protect the Nuiqsut gas pipeline from
atmospheric corrosion per § 192.479. PHMSA stated in a May 23, 2013 Warning Letter (CPF 5-
2013-0008W) to the operator that PHMSA observed that the pipeline was exposed to the
atmosphere at numerous locations where the coating was damaged; that water was present
beneath the damaged coating; and that pitting and corrosion beyond a light surface oxide were
present at these locations. The warning letter indicated that the operator had coating inspection
records dating back to 2010 that showed damage to the coating and corrosion that was beyond a
light surface oxide.
Atmospheric corrosion inspection records for the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline completed in April
2014 and April 2017 show that the damaged coating had not been repaired. In February and
March 2018, NSBEM repaired the damaged coating on the pipeline. During the repairs, the
operator noted pitting with a depth of 20 mils (0.020 inches) or deeper at 43 locations, with the
deepest pit depth of 47 mils (0.047 inches, or approximately 23 percent wall loss).
NSBEM failed to demonstrate that corrosion pitting on the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline would
not affect the safe operation of the pipeline before the next scheduled inspection. For example,
the report for the April 2017 atmospheric corrosion inspection does not show that pitting was
observed in the 234 inspection sites covered by that report; however, in 2018, the NSBEM
repaired 3,543 damaged coating sites and found pitting at 43 locations. This suggests the 2017
atmospheric corrosion inspection failed to identify the pitting and therefore cannot demonstrate it
would not affect the safe operation of the pipeline before the next scheduled inspection.
4



6. § 192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) Each operator must inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed
to the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion, as follows:
If the pipeline is
located:
Then the frequency of inspection is:
Onshore Offshore At least once every 3 calendar years, but with intervals not
exceeding 39 months
At least once each calendar year, but with intervals not
exceeding 15 months
Consecutive atmospheric corrosion inspections of aboveground portions of the Barrow natural
gas pipeline occurred in July 2014 and then in September 2018, which exceeded the maximum
39-month inspection interval for pipelines located onshore.
7. § 192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) Each operator must inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed
to the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion, as follows:
If the pipeline is
located:
Then the frequency of inspection is:
Onshore Offshore At least once every 3 calendar years, but with intervals not
exceeding 39 months
At least once each calendar year, but with intervals not
exceeding 15 months
During their September 2018 atmospheric corrosion inspection, NSBEM failed to inspect every
portion of the Barrow natural gas pipeline that was exposed to the atmosphere for evidence of
atmospheric corrosion. Specifically, the NSBEM failed to inspect the “S-Curve” separator at
Valve Station 2 and its associated aboveground piping and valves as part of the September 2018
atmospheric corrosion inspection. The report for the September 2018 atmospheric corrosion
inspection shows the boundaries of the areas of the pipeline that NSBEM inspected (piping
circuit diagrams and tabulated inspection data). This report shows that NSBEM omitted the “S-
Curve” and its associated aboveground piping from that inspection. During the December 10,
2019 inspection, PHMSA observed wide-spread coating failures and atmospheric corrosion at
this location.
8. § 192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) ….
(b) During inspections the operator must give particular attention to pipe at soil-to-
air interfaces, under thermal insulation, under disbonded coatings, at pipe supports,
in splash zones, at deck penetrations, and in spans over water.
5



NSBEM failed to inspect the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline at soil-to-air interfaces and under
thermal insulation. The Nuiqsut pipeline has thermal insulation at the soil-to-air interfaces,
but atmospheric corrosion records for inspection reports 2014 and 2017 showed that NSBEM
inspected the pipeline but did not inspect soil-to-air interfaces and areas under thermal insulation,
as required by § 192.481(b).
9. § 192.614 Damage prevention program.
(a) .…
(c) The damage prevention program required by paragraph (a) of this section must,
at a minimum:
(1) Include the identity, on a current basis, of persons who normally engage in
excavation activities in the area in which the pipeline is located.
NSBEM’s damage prevention program failed to include the identity, on a current basis, of
persons who normally engage in excavation activities in the area in which the pipeline is located.
During the inspection, NSBEM personnel stated that they did not maintain a list of any such
excavators.
10. § 192.616 Public awareness.
(a) .…
(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations, including
baseline and supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless the operator
provides justification in its program or procedural manual as to why compliance
with all or certain provisions of the recommended practice is not practicable and
not necessary for safety.
NSBEM failed to follow the general recommendations of API RP 1162. Specifically, NSBEM
did not annually complete an audit or review of the Public Awareness Program's implementation,
as required in Section 8.3 of API RP 1162. During the inspection, NSBEM provided to PHMSA
personnel a completed internal self-assessment worksheet for 2018; however, NSBEM personnel
stated that an audit or review for the years prior to 2018 was never completed. NSBEM did not
provide justification as to why compliance with that provision was not practicable or necessary
for safety.
In addition, as of January 7, 2020, the operator had not evaluated the effectiveness of their public
awareness program, which is required by § 192.616(c), Section 8.4 of API 1162, and their own
procedures. Their written Public Awareness Plan (Rev. 6, January 2019) stated:
"The deadline for the first Effectiveness Evaluation will be based on the
creation and implementation date of the original written plan, December
2015. With this in mind, the four-year deadline for this evaluation is
calculated at July 2019 in order to keep in compliance with the federally
established deadline as described in RP 1162."
6



The operator did not complete the 4-Year Effectiveness Evaluation in 2019. The operator did
not provide justification as to why compliance with that provision was not practicable or
necessary for safety.
11. § 192.616 Public awareness.
(a) .…
(d) The operator's program must specifically include provisions to educate the
public, appropriate government organizations, and persons engaged in excavation
related activities on:
(3) Physical indications that such a release may have occurred;
NSBEM’s 2019 Public Awareness flyer, which was used to educate the public in Nuiqsut on the
physical indications of a possible release, stated that "Natural gas smells like rotten
eggs." NSBEM’s Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline is un-odorized, thus the information provided to
the public in the flyer failed to educate the public as required by the regulation.
12. § 192.707 Line markers for mains and transmission lines.
(a) .…
(c) Pipelines aboveground. Line markers must be placed and maintained along each
section of a main and transmission line that is located aboveground in an area
accessible to the public.
On the Barrow natural gas pipeline, NSBEM failed to place and maintain line markers along
each section of its transmission line that is located aboveground in an area accessible to the
public. There is an above-ground portion of the Barrow pipeline located on a causeway that is
accessible to the public that did not have pipeline markers on either side.
13. § 192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and testing.
(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs), and pressure
regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at intervals not exceeding 15
months, but at least once each calendar year, to inspections and tests to determine
that it is—
NSBEM failed to inspect each pressure regulating station at least once each calendar year at
intervals not to exceed 15 months. The Barrow natural gas pipeline’s pressure is regulated by six
pressure control valves (PCVs) at two facilities (specifically, PCV214A, PCV214B, PCV237A,
and PCV237B at the Primary Gas Handling Facilities and PCV001 and PCV002 at the South
Gas Handling Facility). These PCVs are the primary pressure control on the pipeline; they
reduce the pressure from the upstream gathering system (maximum 900 psig) to the Barrow
natural gas pipeline’s normal operating pressure (approximately 290 psig). NSBEM provided
records showing that the pressure regulating stations on the Barrow natural gas pipeline were
inspected on June 11, 2016 and December 7, 2017, which exceeded the maximum 15-month
interval.
7



14. § 192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and testing.
(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs), and pressure
regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at intervals not exceeding 15
months, but at least once each calendar year, to inspections and tests to determine
that it is—
(1) In good mechanical condition;
(2) Adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the
service in which it is employed;
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, set to control or relieve at
the correct pressure consistent with the pressure limits of §192.201(a); and
(4) Properly installed and protected from dirt, liquids, or other conditions that
might prevent proper operation.
NSBEM failed to ensure that a pressure control valve, PCV-214A, was "in good mechanical
condition" during its June 2016 inspection. PCV-214A is a Pressure Control Valve at the PGHF,
which is a pressure regulating facility for the Barrow natural gas pipeline. The worksheet for the
June 2016 inspection indicated that there was audible leak-by at PCV-214A and that the valve
needed to be re-built, but the operator had not repaired the valve by the December 2017
inspection (the leak-by was still present and noted on the December 2017 inspection
worksheet). During PHMSA's 2019/2020 inspection the operator stated that the leak-by had still
not been repaired.
15. § 192.743 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Capacity of relief devices.
(a) Pressure relief devices at pressure limiting stations and pressure regulating
stations must have sufficient capacity to protect the facilities to which they are
connected. Except as provided in §192.739(b), the capacity must be consistent with
the pressure limits of § 192.201(a). This capacity must be determined at intervals
not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, by testing the devices
in place or by review and calculations.
NSBEM failed to test in place or review the capacity of the relief devices at the pressure
regulating stations in the Primary Gas Handling Facility (PGHF) and South Gas
Handling Facilities (SGHF). The PGHF and SGHF both have pressure regulating stations that
reduce the pressure from the gathering system (maximum approximately 900 psi) to the Barrow
transmission pipeline's operating pressure (typically 290 psi). PSV 360 and RV005 are the relief
valves in the PGHF and SGHF, respectively. NSBEM stated during the inspection that they had
never tested the devices in place nor reviewed the capacity calculations.
16. § 192.807 Recordkeeping.
(a) .…
(b) Records supporting an individual's current qualification shall be maintained
while the individual is performing the covered task. Records of prior qualification
8



and records of individuals no longer performing covered tasks shall be retained for
a period of five years.
NSBEM failed to retain Operator Qualification (OQ) records prior to 2016. Personnel operating
pipelines for the North Slope Borough work under contract; the operator stated that, in 2016, the
prior contract company, operating on behalf of the North Slope Borough, destroyed the OQ
records.
Proposed Civil Penalty
Under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed
$218,647 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for a
related series of violations. For violations occurring on or after November 27, 2018 and before
July 31, 2019, the maximum penalty may not exceed $213,268 per violation per day, with a
maximum penalty not to exceed $2,132,679. For violations occurring on or after November 2,
2015 and before November 27, 2018, the maximum penalty may not exceed $209,002 per
violation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $2,090,022. For violations occurring
prior to November 2, 2015, the maximum penalty may not exceed $200,000 per violation per
day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $2,000,000 for a related series of violations. We
have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documentation involved for the above probable
violations and recommend that you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $151,900 as
follows:
Item number
PENALTY
6
13
14
$38,000
$55,200
$58,700
Warning Items
With respect to items 10, 11, and 16, 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 promptly correct these items.
Failure to do so may result in additional enforcement action.
Proposed Compliance Order
With respect to items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, and 15, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60118, the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order
to North Slope Borough Energy Management. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order,
which is enclosed and made a part of this Notice.
Response to this Notice
Enclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators
in Enforcement Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. All
material you submit in response to this enforcement action may be made publicly available. If
9



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).
Following the receipt of this Notice, you have 30 days to submit written comments, or request a
hearing under 49 CFR § 190.211. If you do not respond within 30 days of receipt of this Notice,
this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice and authorizes the
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further
notice to you and to issue a Final Order. If you are responding to this Notice, we propose that
you submit your correspondence to my office within 30 days from receipt of this Notice. This
period may be extended by written request for good cause.
In your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 5-2020-0010 and, for each document
you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.
Sincerely,
Dustin Hubbard
Director, Western Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Enclosures: Proposed Compliance Order
Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement Proceedings
cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry
PHP-500 Jake Gano (#166675, #166676, #166677)
10



PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
Pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to North Slope Borough Energy Management a
Compliance Order incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance
of North Slope Borough Energy Management with the pipeline safety regulations:
A. B. C. In regard to Item 1 of the Notice pertaining to the control line for the pressure
control valves on the Barrow natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy
Management must:
A.1 Within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, provide to the Director of the
Western Region a written work plan to secure the stainless-steel sensing line. The
work plan must include design drawings showing a configuration that ensures that
the sensing line is protected from damage, and that the pipeline’s MAOP cannot
be exceeded as a result of the failure of the sensing line.
A.2 Upon receiving a notice of non-objection from the Director of the Western
Region, North Slope Borough Energy Management must implement that work
plan within 90 days.
A.3 Within 30 days of completing the activities described in A.2, provide to the
Director of the Western Region as-built drawings and photographs demonstrating
that activities were completed consistent with the work plan.
In regard to Item 2 of the Notice pertaining to inadequate levels of cathodic
protection on the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy
Management must:
B.1 Within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order, provide to the Director of the
Western Region a written assessment of the viability of meeting cathodic
protection criteria on the pipeline. The assessment must show the horizontal and
vertical alignment of the pipeline; locations of current and historic inadequate
cathodic protection levels along the alignment; and the horizontal and vertical
locations of known permafrost (for example from boreholes, thermistor data,
original construction data) and relevant surface features (for example ponding,
thaw bulbs, river channels).
B.2 If the assessment described in B.1 shows areas of inadequate cathodic
protection levels where the pipeline is buried coinciding with locations that
cannot be demonstrated to be permafrost, the assessment in B.1 must also include
a written work plan to address the areas of inadequate cathodic protection and/or
the data gaps.
B.3 Upon receiving a notice of non-objection from the Director of the Western
Region, North Slope Borough Energy Management must implement the work
plan described in B.2 within 180 days, and must provide to the Director of the
Western Region the records associated with that work within 90 days of
completion.
In regard to Items 3 and 4 of the Notice pertaining to inadequate electrical
isolation on the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy
11



D. E. F. Management must, within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order, install electrical
insulating device(s) at the upstream end of the buried segment; conduct testing at
both the upstream and downstream end of the buried segment to show that the
pipeline is electrically isolated from other buried structures that are not intended
to be cathodically protected as a single unit (including, at a minimum, the PRV
station at the downstream end of the buried segment and the nearest vertical
support member at the upstream end of the buried segment); and, within 30 days
of completing these activities, provide records demonstrating the electrical
isolation of the pipeline to the Director of the Western Region.
In regard to Item 5 of the Notice pertaining to coating of the Nuiqsut Natural gas
pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy Management must:
D.1 Within 90 days of receiving the Final Order, submit to the Director of the
Western Region a written assessment and maintenance plan for maintaining the
atmospheric corrosion control coatings on its pipelines in accordance with the
regulations. The plan must be incorporated into North Slope Borough Energy
Management’s written corrosion control procedures. The plan must include, at a
minimum, how NSBEM will determine and document whether a corroded
segment meets the criteria for exemption from atmospheric corrosion control per
§ 192.479(c), and the plan must include specific time frames for repairing any
coating damage not meeting the criteria for exemption.
D.2 NSBEM must provide to the Director of the Western Region a listing of all
locations on the pipelines that are uncoated or the coating is damaged, the results
of any corrosion assessment performed at those locations, and a written repair
plan for those locations. NSBEM must submit the plan within 90 days of
receiving the final order, and must implement the repair plan as required by the
regulations.
In regard to Item 7 of the Notice pertaining to atmospheric corrosion inspections
at Valve Station 2 of the Barrow Natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough
Energy Management must:
E.1 Within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, complete an atmospheric
corrosion inspection of Valve Station 2, which must include all valves, the “S
Curve” separator, the associated drain lines, and any other components through
which natural gas may flow.
E.2 Within 90 days of completing the inspection described in E.1, protect areas
where atmospheric corrosion is found as required by § 192.481(c).
E.3 Within 30 days of completing the activities described in E.1 and E.2, provide
records of the inspection and coating repairs or replacement to the Director of the
Western Region.
In regard to Item 8 of the Notice pertaining to the insulated soil-to-air interface on
the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy Management must
assess the condition of the insulation and outer coating within 180 days of receipt
of the Final Order. If damage to the outer coating is found during the assessment,
North Slope Borough Energy Management must, as soon as practicable but no
later than 30 days following the assessment, assess the condition of the inner pipe
and inner pipe’s coating; assess the presence or extent of wet insulation; and
12



G. H. I. J. K. repair or replace any wet insulation and damaged inner or outer coating.
In regard to Item 9 of the Notice pertaining to identifying excavators for the
purpose of damage prevention notifications, North Slope Borough Energy
Management must, within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, amend its mailing
list for damage prevention notifications to include excavators who normally
engage in excavation activities in the area in which the Barrow and Nuiqsut
natural gas pipelines are located. North Slope Borough Energy Management must
consider, at a minimum, excavators who frequently use the one-call system but
are not located in Barrow or Nuiqsut and therefore are not currently part of their
mailing list.
In regard to Item 12 of the Notice pertaining to line markers on the Barrow
natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy Management must install line
markers on the Barrow natural gas pipeline at all areas where the pipeline is
above-ground and accessible to the public (including, at a minimum, the above-
ground pipeline segment at the causeway crossing) within 180 days of receipt of
the Final Order. The North Slope Borough must provide notice to the Director of
the Western Region with 30 days of completing the installation.
In regard to Item 14 of the Notice pertaining to the audible leak on Pressure
Control Valve PVC214A at the Primary Gas Handling Facility on the Barrow
natural gas pipeline, North Slope Borough Energy Management must repair or
replace PCV-214A within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order. The North Slope
Borough must provide notice to the Director of the Western Region within 30
days of completing the repair or replacement.
In regard to Item 15 of the Notice pertaining to review of capacity calculations
for pressure relief valves protecting the Barrow natural gas pipeline, North Slope
Borough Energy Management must:
J.1 Within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, provide to the Director of the
Western Region calculations of the required capacity for each relief device
consistent with § 192.201 and calculations of the relief capacities for each device
under conditions which it operates consistent with § 192.743(b).
J.2 If the activities described in J.1 demonstrate that any relief valves lack
adequate capacity, the operator must provide, along with the calculations, a
written work plan to address any deficiencies.
J.3 Upon receiving a notice of non-objection from the Director of the Western
Region, implement that work plan within 90 days.
J.4 Within 30 days of completing the activities described in J.3, provide to the
Director of the Western Region as-built drawings and photographs demonstrating
that activities were completed consistent with the work plan.
It is requested (not mandated) that North Slope Borough Energy Management
maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling
this Compliance Order and submit the total to Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western
Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. 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.
13

520200010_Final Order_06152021_(19-166675S)_text.pdf

June 15, 2021
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: harry.brower@north-slope.org
The Honorable Harry K. Brower, Jr., Mayor
Mayor of the North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough Energy Management
P.O. Box 69
Barrow, Alaska 99723
Re: CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Dear Mayor Brower:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation, assesses a civil penalty of $151,900, and specifies actions that need to be taken by
North Slope Borough Energy Management to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. The
penalty payment terms are set forth in the Final Order. When the civil penalty has been paid and
the terms of the compliance order completed, as determined by the Director, Western Region,
this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by electronic mail is effective
upon the date of transmission 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. Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Mr. Scott K. Danner, Director, Department of Public Works, North Slope Borough,
scott.danner@north-slope.org
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 )
North Slope Borough Energy Management, ) CPF No. 5-2020-0010
)
)
)
Respondent. )
__________________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
On December 9-13, 2019, and March 10, 2020, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives 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 North
Slope Borough Energy Management (NSB) in Utqiagvik and North Slope Borough, Alaska.
NSB operates the Barrow and Nuiqsut natural gas pipelines with over 160 miles of plastic pipe.
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated November 18, 2020, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil
Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice), which also included a warning pursuant to
49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that
NSB had committed thirteen (13) violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 192 and proposed assessing a civil
penalty of $151,900 for the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed ordering Respondent to
take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The warning items required no further
action, but warned the operator to correct the probable violations or face possible future
enforcement action.
NSB responded to the Notice by letter dated December 2, 2020 (Response). The company
contested two of the allegations, offered additional information in response to the Notice,
requested that the proposed civil penalty be reduced, and requested that the proposed compliance
order be modified.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.203(b)(9), which states in
relevant part:
§ 192.203 Instrument, control, and sampling pipe and components.



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 2
(a) . . . .
(b) Materials and design. All materials employed for pipe and
components must be designed to meet the particular conditions of service
and the following:
(9) Each control line must be protected from anticipated causes of
damage and must be designed and installed to prevent damage to any one
control line from making both the regulator and the over-pressure protective
device inoperative.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.203(b)(9) by not protecting the
control line between the Primary Gas Handling Facility and Pipeline Valve Station 1 from
anticipated causes of damage, like soughing snow or ice, on the Barrow natural gas pipeline.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that four pressure control valves (PCV214A, PCV214B,
PCV237A, and PCV237B) share a common stainless steel sensing/control line, which is located
outside and shares pipe supports with nearby piping. The sensing/control line could be damaged
by sloughing snow or ice, particularly at the mid-point of the span between pipe supports. NSB
did not protect the sensing/control line from anticipated sloughing snow or ice.
In its Response, NSB stated its belief that the line was well protected, but did not provide any
additional evidence or documentation to demonstrate compliance with § 192.203. NSB stated,
however, that it would retain a third-party engineer to assess the line configuration to determine
what changes, if any, were necessary to ensure compliance with § 192.203 and would provide
that information to the Director.
After considering all the evidence, I find that Respondent did not present any evidence to rebut
the alleged violation in the Notice. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.
§ 192.203(b)(9) by failing to protect each control line from anticipated causes of damage.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d) which states:
§ 192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) . . . .
(d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any
deficiencies indicated by the monitoring.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d) by failing to take prompt
remedial action to correct deficiencies found during its 2017, 2018, and 2019 cathodic protection
(CP) monitoring of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline. Specifically, the Notice alleged that the CP
inspections found locations along the buried portion of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline that did
not meet one or more applicable criteria contained in appendix B of Part 192. Despite NSB’s
records showing inadequate CP potentials, Respondent failed to take any remedial measures to
ensure the pipeline meets CP requirements.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d) by failing to take prompt
remedial action to correct deficiencies indicated by CP monitoring and inspections.



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 3
Item 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.467(a), which states:
§ 192.467 External corrosion control: Electrical isolation.
(a) Each buried or submerged pipeline must be electrically isolated from
other underground metallic structures, unless the pipeline and the other
structures are electrically interconnected and cathodically protected as a
single unit.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.467(a) by failing to isolate the
buried segment of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline from other underground metallic structures.
The Notice further alleged the pipeline and other structures were not electrically interconnected
and cathodically protected as a single unit. Specifically, the Notice alleged that CP inspection
reports noted that a bare copper wire was bonded to the Nuiqsut transmission pipeline.
Furthermore, NSB could not verify that the pipeline was isolated from the pressure reducing
valve facility piping.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.467(a) by failing to electrically
isolate the buried pipeline from other underground metallic structures.
Item 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.467(d), which states:
§ 192.467 External corrosion control: Electrical isolation.
(a) . . . .
(d) Inspection and electrical tests must be made to assure that electrical
isolation is adequate.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.467(d) by failing to make
inspections and electrical tests to assure that electrical isolation is adequate at the upstream end
of the buried segment of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline. Specifically, the Notice alleged that
PHMSA observed potential lack of isolation between the pipeline and the buried, bare steel
vertical support members which support the above ground pipeline. NSB was unable to
demonstrate that an inspection and electrical test had occurred at this location and that the
electrical isolation was adequate.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.467(d) by failing to inspect and
conduct electrical tests to assure that electrical isolation is adequate at the upstream end of the
buried segment of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline.
Item 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.479(a), which states:
§ 192.479 Atmospheric corrosion control: General.
(a) Each operator must clean and coat each pipeline or portion of
pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere, except pipelines under paragraph



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 4
(c) of this section.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.479(a) by failing to clean and coat
each portion of the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline that was exposed to the atmosphere. Specifically,
the Notice alleged that NSB operated the Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline between 2010 and 2018
without adequate atmospheric corrosion control coating, and with corrosion present that was
beyond light surface oxide. NSB also failed to demonstrate that the corrosion would not affect
the safe operation of the pipeline before the next schedule inspection under the § 192.479(c)(2)
exception.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.479(a) by failing to clean and coat
each pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere.
Item 6: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a), which states in
relevant part:
§ 192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.1
(a) Each operator must inspection each pipeline or portion of pipeline
that is exposed to the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion, as
follows:
If the pipeline is
located:
Then the frequency of inspection is:
Onshore . . . . Offshore . . . . At least once every 3 calendar years, but with
intervals not exceeding 39 months
At least once each calendar year, but with
intervals not exceeding 15 months
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a) by failing to inspect the
aboveground portions of the Barrow natural gas pipeline within the required frequency.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that NSB inspected the Barrow natural gas pipeline in July 2014,
and then in September 2018, which exceeded the maximum 39-month inspection interval for
onshore pipelines.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a) by failing to inspect each
pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion within the
required interval of once every three calendar years, not exceeding 39 months.
Item 7: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a), as quoted above.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a) by failing to inspect every
1 Section 192.481(a) was amended on January 11, 2021 (86 FR 2240). The version quoted here was in effect at the
time of the PHMSA inspection and issuance of the Notice.



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 5
portion of the Barrow natural gas pipeline that was exposed to the atmosphere for evidence of
atmospheric corrosion during NSB’s September 2018 atmospheric corrosion inspection.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that the September 2018 atmospheric corrosion inspection failed
to inspect the “S-Curve” separator at Valve Station 2 and its associated aboveground pipeline
and valves.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a) by failing to inspect the
“S-Curve” separator and associated piping and valves as part of NSB’s September 2018
atmospheric corrosion inspection.
Item 8: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b), which states:
§ 192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) . . . .
(b) During inspections the operator must give particular attention to pipe
at soil-to-air interfaces, under thermal insulation, under disbanded coatings,
at pipe supports, in splash zones, at deck penetrations, and in spans over
water.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) by failing to inspect the
Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline at soil-to-air interfaces and under thermal insulation. Specifically,
the Notice alleged that NSB atmospheric corrosion records for the 2014 and 2017 inspection
reports showed that NSB inspected the pipeline, but did not inspect soil-to-air interfaces and
areas of thermal insulation.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) by failing to inspect the
soil-to-air interfaces and under thermal insulation as part of NSB’s atmospheric corrosion
inspections.
Item 9: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.614(c)(1), which states:
§ 192.614 Damage prevention program.
(a) . . . .
(c) The damage prevention program required by paragraph (a) of this
section must, at a minimum:
(1) Include the identity, on a current basis, of persons who normally
engage in excavation activities in the areas in which the pipeline is located.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.614(c)(1) by failing to include, in
NSB’s damage prevention program, the identity of persons who normally engage in excavation
activities in the area in which its pipelines are located. Specifically, the Notice alleged that
during the inspection, NSB personnel stated that the operator did not maintain a list of any such
excavators.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 6
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.614(c)(1) by failing to include,
in its damage prevention program, the identity, on a current basis, of persons who normally
engage in excavation activities in the area in which NSB has located its pipelines.
Item 12: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.707(c), which states:
§ 192.707 Line markers for mains and transmission lines.
(a) . . . .
(c) Pipelines aboveground. Line markers must be placed and
maintained along each section of a main and transmission line that is located
aboveground in an area accessible to the public.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.707(c) by failing to place and
maintain line markers along each section of the Barrow natural gas pipeline that is located
aboveground in an area accessible to the public. Specifically, the Notice alleged that NSB failed
to place and maintain line markers along an above-ground portion of the Barrow pipeline located
on a causeway that is accessible to the public.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.707(c) by failing to place and
maintain line markers along the section of the Barrow pipeline located on a causeway that is
accessible to the public.
Item 13: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a), which states in
relevant part:
§ 192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and
testing.
(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs),
and pressure regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at
intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, to
inspections and tests . . . .
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a) by failing to inspect each
pressure regulating station at least each calendar year at intervals not to exceed 15 months.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that NSB’s records only demonstrated it inspected its Barrow
natural gas pipeline’s pressure control valves on June 11, 2016, and then again on December 7,
2017, which exceeded the 15-month maximum interval.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a) by exceeding the
maximum, 15-month interval for inspecting its pressure regulating stations.
Item 14: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a), which states:
§ 192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 7
testing.
(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs),
and pressure regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at
intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, to
inspections and tests to determine that it is—
(1) In good mechanical condition;
(2) Adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation
for the service in which it is employed;
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, set to control or
relieve at the correct pressure consistent with the pressure limits of
§ 192.201(a); and
(4) Properly installed and protected from dirt, liquids, or other
conditions that might prevent proper operation.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a) by failing to ensure that
pressure control valve, PCV-214A, was “in good mechanical condition” during its June 2016
inspection. Specifically, the Notice alleged that NSB’s June 2016 inspection documentation
indicated that there was an audible leak-by at PCV-214A and that the valve needed to be re-built.
NSB had not repaired the valve by NSB’s next inspection in December 2017, or by PHMSA’s
2019/2020 inspection.
In its Response, NSB claimed the valve was in good mechanical condition, and provided an
email from the vendor of the pressure control valve which claimed that the valve, when operating
in accordance with the manufacturer’s tolerances, can flow up to approximately 88 scfm
(standard cubic feet per minute) when closed.
Having considered the information presented, I find that during NSB’s June 2016 inspection, the
operator noted an audible leak-by, and that the valve needed to be re-built, but failed to take any
action until after PHMSA’s 2019/2020 inspection. NSB has not provided any evidence of
inspecting or testing the valve to make sure it is in good mechanical condition as required by the
regulation. The vendor’s statement that Respondent produced, which was based on the purchase
specification, does not represent a regulatory or performance standard for in-situ valves. It was
also dated November 2020, over four years after Respondent’s own records indicated that the
valve needed to be re-built. NSB also did not provide any evidence that it had investigated the
actual flow rate of the valve to ensure that it was not injurious to the pipeline downstream of
PCV-214A. NSB had installed this valve in parallel with PCV-214B, but only one was having
an audible leak-by, which indicates some degradation of performance. NSB’s records did not
demonstrate the operator conducted periodic preventative maintenance consistent with the
original equipment manufacturers’ recommendations. Therefore, the evidence demonstrates
Respondent failed to properly determine the valve was in good mechanical condition.
Accordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.
§ 192.739(a) by failing to ensure that pressure control valve, PCV-214A, was “in good
mechanical condition.” .
Item 15: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.743(a), which states:



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 8
§ 192.743 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Capacity of relief devices.
(a) Pressure relief devices at pressure limiting stations and pressure
regulating stations must have sufficient capacity to protect the facilities to
which they are connected. Except as provided in § 192.739(b), the capacity
must be consistent with the pressure limits of § 192.201(a). This capacity
must be determined at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once
each calendar year, by testing the devices in place or by review and
calculations.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.743(a) by failing to test in place or
review the capacity of the relief devices at the pressure regulating stations in the Primary Gas
Handling Facility (PGHF) and the South Gas Handling Facilities (SGHF). Specifically, the
Notice alleged that the PGHF and SGHF both have pressure regulating stations that reduce the
pressure from the gathering system to the Barrow transmission pipeline’s operating pressure.
The pressure relief valves for PGHF and SGHF, PSV 360 and RV005 respectively, have never
been tested in place, and NSB has not reviewed the capacity calculations.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.743(a) by failing to test in place
or review the capacity of relief devices, PSV 360 and RV005, to determine their respective
capacities.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent.
ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY
Under 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed
$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any
related series of violations.2 In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.
§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,
circumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the
degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; any effect that
the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing business; the good faith of Respondent in
attempting to comply with the pipeline safety regulations; and self-disclosure or actions to
correct a violation prior to discovery by PHMSA. In addition, I may consider the economic
benefit gained from the violation without any reduction because of subsequent damages, and
such other matters as justice may require. The Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $151,900
for the violations cited above.
Item 6: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $38,000 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.
2 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 C.F.R. § 190.223.



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 9
§ 192.481(a), for failing to inspect the aboveground portions of the Barrow natural gas pipeline
that is exposed to the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion within the maximum 39-
month interval.
In its Response, NSB stated that it self-corrected this oversight and brought itself into
compliance with PHMSA’s requirements. NSB requested that the proposed civil penalty be
reconsidered in light of the operator’s actions to self-correct this oversight prior to any notice
from PHMSA.
While Respondent indicated that it has corrected the violation by completing the required
inspection, Respondent remediated the violation only after PHMSA discovered the violation
during an inspection and well beyond the interval established by the regulation. Under such
circumstances, I find a penalty reduction is not warranted. Accordingly, having reviewed the
record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $38,000 for
violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(a).
Item 13: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $55,200 for Respondent’s violation of 49
C.F.R. § 192.739(a), for failing to inspect each pressure regulating station for the Barrow natural
gas pipeline at least once each calendar year at intervals not to exceed 15 months.
In its Response, NSB claimed two justifications for a penalty reduction: (1) its Gas Field
Operations have self-corrected this specific oversite, and (2) it has met this annual requirement
for inspection in each subsequent year since the violation. The operator requested a penalty
recalculation to reflect this information.
First, as stated above, I do not find a penalty reduction is warranted where Respondent has
remediated a violation after it was discovered by PHMSA. Here, NSB corrected the violation
after PHMSA discovered it during the 2019/2020 inspection. Second, subsequent compliance
after remediation does not justify a penalty reduction, as Respondent already has an obligation to
comply with the regulation going forward. For these reasons, I do not find sufficient grounds to
reduce the proposed penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the
assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $55,200 for violation of 49 C.F.R.
§ 192.739(a).
Item 14: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $58,700 for Respondent’s violation of 49
C.F.R. § 192.739(a), for failing to ensure that pressure control valve, PCV-214A, was in good
mechanical condition.
In its response, NSB contested the allegation and, therefore, also requested that PHMSA
withdraw the associated civil penalty. For the reasons discussed above, Item 14 is upheld.
Respondent did not present any additional grounds to mitigate the proposed penalty.
Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess
Respondent a civil penalty of $58,700 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a).
In summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the
Items cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $151,900.



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 10
Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Federal regulations (49
C.F.R. § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer 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 (AMK-325), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 S MacArthur Blvd, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 79169.
The Financial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8845.
Failure to pay the $151,900 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%) 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 district
court of the United States.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, and 15
in the Notice for violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.203(b)(9), 192.465(d), 192.467(a), 192.467(d),
192.479(a), 192.481(a), 192.481(b), 192.614(c)(1), 192.707(c), 192.739(a), and 192.743(a)
respectively. 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.
With regard to the violation of § 192.465(d) (Item 2), Respondent requested the compliance
terms be modified. Due to the seasonal nature of non-frozen soils needed to complete the actions
specified in the proposed compliance order, NSB requested more time to complete the proposed
actions. The Director, Western Region, found this request reasonable and appropriate and
recommended additional time be provided in the Compliance Order. I agree. Item 2 of the
Compliance Order is modified as set forth below.
Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Respondent is
ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety regulations
applicable to its operations:
A. With respect to the violation of § 192.203(b)(9) (Item 1), Respondent must:
1. Within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, provide to the Director of the Western
Region a written work plan to secure the stainless-steel sensing line. The work plan
must include design drawings showing a configuration that ensures that the sensing
line is protected from damage, and that the pipeline’s MAOP cannot be exceeded as a
result of the failure of the sensing line.
2. Upon receiving a notice of non-objection from the Director of the Western Region,



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 11
North Slope Borough Energy Management must implement that work plan within 90
days of the non-objection.
3. Within 30 days of completing the activities described in A.2, provide to the
Director of the Western Region as-built drawings and photographs demonstrating that
activities were completed consistent with the work plan.
B. With respect to the violation of § 192.465(d) (Item 2), Respondent must:
1. Within 365 days of receipt of the Final Order, provide to the Director of the
Western Region a written assessment of the viability of meeting cathodic protection
criteria on the pipeline. The assessment must show the horizontal and vertical
alignment of the pipeline; locations of current and historic inadequate cathodic
protection levels along the alignment; and the horizontal and vertical locations of
known permafrost (for example from boreholes, thermistor data, original construction
data) and relevant surface features (for example ponding, thaw bulbs, river channels).
2. If the assessment described in B.1 shows areas of inadequate cathodic protection
levels where the pipeline is buried, coinciding with locations that cannot be
demonstrated to be permafrost, the assessment in B.1 must also include a written
work plan to address the areas of inadequate cathodic protection and/or the data gaps.
3. Upon receiving a notice of non-objection from the Director of the Western Region,
North Slope Borough Energy Management must implement the work plan described
in B.2 within 180 days of the non-objection, and must provide to the Director of the
Western Region the records associated with that work within 270 days of completion
of the work, but before 816 days after receipt of the Final Order.
C. With respect to the violations of §§ 192.467(a) and 192.467(d) (Items 3 and 4), Respondent
must within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order, install electrical insulating device(s) at the
upstream end of the buried segment; conduct testing at both the upstream and downstream end of
the buried segment to show that the pipeline is electrically isolated from other buried structures
that are not intended to be cathodically protected as a single unit (including, at a minimum, the
PRV station at the downstream end of the buried segment and the nearest vertical support
member at the upstream end of the buried segment); and, within 30 days of completing these
activities, provide records demonstrating the electrical isolation of the pipeline to the Director of
the Western Region.
D. With respect to the violation of § 192.479(a) (Item 5), Respondent must:
1. Within 90 days of receiving the Final Order, submit to the Director of the Western
Region a written assessment and maintenance plan for maintaining the atmospheric
corrosion control coatings on its pipelines in accordance with the regulations. The
plan must be incorporated into North Slope Borough Energy Management’s written
corrosion control procedures. The plan must include, at a minimum, how NSB will
determine and document whether a corroded segment meets the criteria for exemption



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 12
from atmospheric corrosion control per § 192.479(c), and the plan must include
specific time frames for repairing any coating damage not meeting the criteria for
exemption.
2. NSB must provide to the Director of the Western Region a listing of all locations
on the pipelines that are uncoated or the coating is damaged, the results of any
corrosion assessment performed at those locations, and a written repair plan for those
locations. NSB must submit the plan within 90 days of receiving the Final Order, and
must implement the repair plan as required by the regulations.
E. With respect to the violation of § 192.481(a) (Item 7), Respondent must:
1. Within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, complete an atmospheric corrosion
inspection of Valve Station 2, which must include all valves, the “S Curve” separator,
the associated drain lines, and any other components through which natural gas may
flow.
2. Within 90 days of completing the inspection described in E.1, protect areas where
atmospheric corrosion is found as required by § 192.481(c).
3. Within 30 days of completing the activities described in E.1 and E.2, provide
records of the inspection and coating repairs or replacement to the Director of the
Western Region.
F. With respect to the violation of § 192.481(b) (Item 8), Respondent must assess the condition
of the insulation and outer coating within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order. If damage to the
outer coating is found during the assessment, North Slope Borough Energy Management must,
as soon as practicable but no later than 30 days following the assessment, assess the condition of
the inner pipe and inner pipe’s coating; assess the presence or extent of wet insulation; and repair
or replace any wet insulation and damaged inner or outer coating.
G. With respect to the violation of § 192.614(c)(1) (Item 9), Respondent must, within 90 days of
receipt of the Final Order, amend its mailing list for damage prevention notifications to include
excavators who normally engage in excavation activities in the area in which the Barrow and
Nuiqsut natural gas pipelines are located. North Slope Borough Energy Management must
consider, at a minimum, excavators who frequently use the one-call system but are not located in
Barrow or Nuiqsut and therefore are not currently part of their mailing list.
H. With respect to the violation of § 192.707(c) (Item 12), Respondent must install line markers
on the Barrow natural gas pipeline at all areas where the pipeline is above-ground and accessible
to the public (including, at a minimum, the above-ground pipeline segment at the causeway
crossing) within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order. NSB must provide notice to the Director
of the Western Region with 30 days of completing the installation.
I. With respect to the violation of § 192.739(a) (Item 14), Respondent repair or replace PCV-
214A within 180 days of receipt of the Final Order. NSB must provide notice to the Director of



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 13
the Western Region within 30 days of completing the repair or replacement.
J. With respect to the violation of § 192.743(a) (Item 15), Respondent must:
1. Within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order, provide to the Director of the Western
Region calculations of the required capacity for each relief device consistent with
§ 192.201 and calculations of the relief capacities for each device under conditions
which it operates consistent with § 192.743(b).
2. If the activities described in J.1 demonstrate that any relief valves lack adequate
capacity, the operator must provide, along with the calculations, a written work plan
to address any deficiencies.
3. Upon receiving a notice of non-objection from the Director of the Western Region,
implement that work plan within 90 days.
4. Within 30 days of completing the activities described in J.3, provide to the Director
of the Western Region as-built drawings and photographs demonstrating that
activities were completed consistent with the work plan.
The Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a
written request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an
extension.
PHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs
associated with fulfilling this Compliance 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.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
not to exceed $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (49 C.F.R. § 190.223), for each violation for
each day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a
district court of the United States.
WARNING ITEMS
With respect to Items 10, 11, and 16, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 192, but
identified them as warning items pursuant to § 190.205. The warnings were for:
49 C.F.R. § 192.616(c) (Item 10) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to annually
complete an audit or review of the Public Awareness Program’s implementation;



CPF No. 5-2020-0010
Page 14
49 C.F.R. § 192.616(d)(3) (Item 11) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to identify
NSB’s Nuiqsut natural gas pipeline as un-odorized in its Public Awareness flyer;
and
49 C.F.R. § 192.807(b) (Item 16) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to retain
Operator Qualification records prior to 2016.
NSB presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to address
the cited items. If OPS finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection,
Respondent may be subject to future enforcement action.
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final
Order to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of
Chief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address, no later than 20 days after receipt of service of this
Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a statement of the issue(s) and
meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The filing of a petition automatically stays
the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of the order, including corrective
action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a stay.
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49
C.F.R. § 190.5.
June 15, 2021
___________________________________ __________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520200010>
- Source ID: `phmsa-enforcement`
- SHA-256: `ba08a912fd161096ffebf12bfcba57bee261bf5fa37a9a88f86ad16fc85b994e`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T04:44:44.458Z
- Exported: 2026-08-22T13:17:52.994Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-enforcement-520200010`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "cpf": "520200010",
  "operator": "NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH ENERGY MANAGEMENT",
  "region": "Western",
  "pipelineType": "GAS INTRASTATE ONSHORE",
  "caseStatus": "CLOSED",
  "citedSections": [
    "192.203(b)(9)",
    "192.465(d)",
    "192.467(a)",
    "192.467(d)",
    "192.479(a)",
    "192.481(a)",
    "192.481(b)",
    "192.614(c)(1)",
    "192.616(c)",
    "192.616(d)(3)",
    "192.707(c)",
    "192.739(a)",
    "192.743(a)",
    "192.807(b)"
  ],
  "dataAsOf": "08/04/2026 12PM",
  "caseDataAsOf": "2026-08-04",
  "attachmentCount": 7,
  "attachments": [
    {
      "name": "520200010_Closure Letter_11162023_(19-166675S).pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Closure%20Letter_11162023_(19-166675S).pdf",
      "bytes": 245366,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520200010_Closure Letter_11162023_(19-166675S)_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Closure%20Letter_11162023_(19-166675S)_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 87577,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520200010_Final Order_06152021_(19-166675S).pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Final%20Order_06152021_(19-166675S).pdf",
      "bytes": 292406,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520200010_Final Order_06152021_(19-166675S)_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Final%20Order_06152021_(19-166675S)_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 184509,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520200010_NOPV PCP PCO_11182020.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_11182020.pdf",
      "bytes": 370052,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520200010_NOPV PCP PCO_11182020_text.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_11182020_text.pdf",
      "bytes": 214182,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "520200010_Operator Response to Notice_12022020.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520200010/520200010_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_12022020.pdf",
      "bytes": 260598,
      "category": "party_submission"
    }
  ],
  "extractedAgencyDocumentCount": 3,
  "attachmentPolicy": "Official attachment links are retained. Agency-issued documents may also include a verified local PDF and page-level text representation.",
  "jurisdiction": "US",
  "operatorName": "NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH ENERGY MANAGEMENT"
}
```