# COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 120121012
- **title:** COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2012-05-07
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.481(b).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120121012.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120121012.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120121012
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120121012
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.481(b). The case was opened on 2012-05-07 and is reported as closed as of 2013-05-13. Proposed civil penalty: $28,700. Assessed civil penalty: $28,700. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

120121012_Closure Letter_05132013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_Closure%20Letter_05132013.pdf

120121012_Closure Letter_05132013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_Closure%20Letter_05132013_text.pdf

120121012_Final Order_12272012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_Final%20Order_12272012.pdf

120121012_Final Order_12272012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_Final%20Order_12272012_text.pdf

120121012_NOPV_PCP-PCO_05072012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_NOPV_PCP-PCO_05072012.pdf

120121012_NOPV_PCP_PCO_05072012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_NOPV_PCP_PCO_05072012_text.pdf

120121012_Operator Response_06072012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120121012/120121012_Operator%20Response_06072012.pdf

120121012_Closure Letter_05132013_text.pdf

U.S. Department Of Transportation Pipeline and 609.989.2171
Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103
West Trenton, NJ 08628
OVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY
May 13, 2013
Shawn Patterson
President, Engineering & Project Development
NiSource Gas Transmission & Storage
1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE
Charleston, WV 25314
CPF 1-2012-1012
Dear Mr. Patterson:
On December 27, 2012, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
issued to NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage (for Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. in the
Port Jervis area of Pennsylvania) a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This Order
included a 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,
Byron Coy, PE
Director, Eastern Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

120121012_Final Order_12272012_text.pdf

DECEMBER 27, 2012
Robert C. Skaggs, Jr.
President & CEO
NiSource, Inc.
801 East 86th Ave.
Merrillville, Indiana 46410
Re: CPF No. 1-2012-1012
Dear Mr. Skaggs:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of
violation and assesses a civil penalty of $28,700. It further specifies actions that need to be taken
by NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage Company 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 satisfied, as determined by the Director,
Eastern Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by certified
mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R.
§ 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Byron E. Coy, Eastern Region Director, OPS
Mr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS
Mr. William T. Kilpatrick, Vice President Operations, NiSource Gas Transmission and
Storage Company, 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE, Charleston, WV 25314
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN 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 )
NiSource Gas Transmission & Storage ) Company, )
)
)
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
CPF No. 1-2012-1012
FINAL ORDER
During the week of September 19-23, 2011, 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 NiSource Gas Transmission & Storage
Company’s (NGTSC or Respondent) facilities operated by Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC,
in the Port Jervis area of Pennsylvania. NGTSC is a subsidiary of NiSource, Inc.1 The
Columbia Gas Transmission system consists of approximately 12,000 miles of pipeline
transporting an average of three billion cubic feet of natural gas per day through 10 states.2
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,
by letter dated May 7, 2012, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and
Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice
proposed finding that NGTSC had violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481 and proposed assessing a civil
penalty of $28,700 for the alleged violation. The Notice also proposed ordering Respondent to
take certain measures to correct the alleged violation.
NGTSC responded to the Notice by letter dated June 7, 2012 (Response). The company
contested portions of the allegation, offered additional information in response to the Notice, and
requested that the proposed civil penalty be eliminated. Respondent did not request a hearing
and therefore has waived its right to one.
1 NiSource, Inc., Annual Report (Form 10K), at Exhibit 21 (February 24, 2012).
2 NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage Home Page, http://www ngts.com/en/home.aspx (last visited December
11, 2012).



2
FINDING 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. § 192.481(b), which states:
§ 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…
(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.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) by failing to give particular
attention during atmospheric corrosion inspections to portions of the pipeline under thermal
insulation. Specifically, the Notice alleged that NGTSC did not have general guidance or
specified prescribed locations in its procedures advising staff where corrosion would likely occur
on pipe under thermal insulation. In addition, the Notice alleged that when company records
were reviewed for the period from 2008 through 2011, there were no records showing any
insulation that had ever been removed to inspect for atmospheric corrosion. Finally, the Notice
alleged that at the Easton and Hellertown Compressor stations, there was piping and other
pipeline facilities encased in thermal insulation, and that company personnel acknowledge that
they did not remove the insulation to inspect for atmospheric corrosion.
In its Response, NGTSC did not contest the allegation that it failed to give particular attention to
the possibility of atmospheric corrosion under thermal insulation and conceded that its personnel
did not remove the insulation during the atmospheric corrosion inspections at the Easton and
Hellertown Compression Stations. NGTSC contended, however, that when NGTSC personnel
“indicated that they do not remove insulation during the atmospheric inspection, they were
specifically referring to the areas noted at Easton and Hellertown, and were not referring to a
standard practice for all insulated pipe.”3 NGTSC stated that the facilities in question at Easton
and Hellertown were located in covered areas inside of buildings and not considered prone to
corrosion; therefore, the insulation was not removed.
Section 192.481 requires that pipeline operators inspect each onshore pipeline that is exposed to
the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion. During such inspections, an operator
must give particular attention to certain pipeline features, such as pipe at soil-to-air interfaces,
under thermal insulation, under disbonded coatings, and at pipe supports. NGTSC’s Procedure
70.001.001, Inspection – Atmospheric Corrosion, Section 2.5.1, states that any insulation where
corrosion has been found during the last inspection or where corrosion is likely to occur must be
removed. However, the procedures did not contain general guidance or specific prescribed
locations in the procedures advising staff of where corrosion would likely occur. Section 2.5.6 1
of the procedure states that NGTSC must record what insulation has been removed during the
inspection. NGTSC, however, did not have any records of insulation that had ever been removed
3 Response at 2.



3
for the purpose of inspecting underneath for atmospheric corrosion, nor did the company produce
any such records in its Response.
Contrary to NGTSC’s assertion, the regulation does not somehow “exempt” an operator from
removing thermal insulation during an inspection from portions of a pipeline that are located in
covered areas that the operator has generally determined are not considered prone to corrosion.
As PHMSA has previously explained, “local moisture conditions, chemicals in the environment,
and air-soil interfaces may result in severe corrosion in areas where corrosion is not expected.” 4
In accordance with § 192.481 and its own procedures, NGTSC should have identified in its
procedures that there was a need to give particular attention to facilities covered by thermal
insulation and should have provided guidance on how to do that.
In summary, the record shows that NGTSC failed, in conducting its atmospheric corrosion
program, to pay particular attention to pipe under thermal insulation. This conclusion is
supported by the company’s failure to include in its procedures any guidance on how to identify
those locations where pipe under insulation might be particularly susceptible to corrosion, by the
fact that there were no records of insulation ever having been removed during NGTSC
inspections, and by the statements of company personnel who acknowledged that they had never
removed insulation at the Easton and Hellertown Compressor Stations. Accordingly, after
considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) by failing
to give particular attention during atmospheric corrosion inspections to portions of the pipeline
under thermal insulation.
This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense 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
$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any
related series of violations. 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; the Respondent’s
ability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing
business; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety
regulations. 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 $28,700 for the violation cited above.
Item 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $28,700 for Respondent’s violation of
49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b), for failing to give particular attention during atmospheric corrosion
inspections to portions of the pipeline under thermal insulation. As discussed above, I found that
4 PHMSA Interp. No. PI-ZZ-092 (Feb. 14, 2003) (on file with PHMSA).



4
NGTSC failed to give particular attention during atmospheric corrosion inspections to portions
of the pipeline under thermal insulation.
NGTSC requested withdrawal of the civil penalty associated with Item 1, citing the $250,000
cost it would likely incur in meeting the terms of the proposed Compliance Order. Additionally,
NGTSC asserted that it had taken various actions to improve its corrosion control program.
Respondent completed atmospheric corrosion on inspections on the insulated piping on
September 28, 2011, at Hellertown and on December 13, 2011, at Easton.
While I acknowledge the value of these various actions taken by NGTSC, the fact remains that
most of them were performed after the inspection and were ones that any reasonable and prudent
operator might take following an inspection to ensure compliance and to protect against
atmospheric corrosion. I also find that the actions taken do not cure the violation itself or
warrant a reduction in the civil penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered
the assessment criteria for the Item cited above, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $28,700
for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 191.481(b).
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 (AMZ-341), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 269039, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125. The
Financial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8893.
Failure to pay the $28,700 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 Item 1 in the Notice for violation of
49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b). 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 Director has indicated that
Respondent has taken the following actions to address some of the cited violations:
With respect to the violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) (Item 1), NGTSC provided an
amended procedure titled 70.001.001 Inspection – Atmospheric Corrosion.
However, I find that compliance has not been achieved with respect to this violation. The
amended procedure submitted by NGTSC remains inadequate because it provides no guidance as



5
to how company personnel should identify those areas where corrosion is likely to occur.
Therefore, 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:
1. With respect to the violation of § 192.481 (Item 1), Respondent must:
a. b. c. In regard to Item Number 1 of the Notice, pertaining to atmospheric
corrosion on piping under thermal insulation, NGTSC shall modify its
written Procedure 70.001.001, Inspection – Atmospheric Corrosion,
Section 2.5, to provide specific details on how it will give particular
attention to monitoring atmospheric corrosion on piping under thermal
insulation. The revised procedure shall provide guidance to its staff in
identifying where atmospheric corrosion is more likely to occur.
Subsequently, NGTSC must identify those locations at Easton and
Hellertown Compressor Stations. The revised procedures must be
submitted to PHMSA for review.
The revised written procedures shall be completed within 30 days of
receipt of the Final Order. NGTSC shall provide documentation to
demonstrate that the appropriate inspections have been completed in
accordance with the revised written procedure within 120 days of receipt
of the Final Order.
It is requested that NGTSC maintain documentation of the safety
improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and
submit the total to Byron Coy, Director, Eastern 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.
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.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
not to exceed $100,000 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.
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of
this Final Order. The petition must be sent to: 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. PHMSA
will accept petitions received no later than 20 days after receipt of service of this Final Order by
the Respondent, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other
requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.215. The filing of a petition automatically stays the payment of



6
any civil penalty assessed. Unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a stay, all
other terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with
49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
___________________________________ __________________________
Jeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 18873