# ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP) — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 120171010
- **title:** ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP) — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2017-06-28
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.167(a)(4)(ii).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120171010.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120171010.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120171010
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120171010
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP). PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.167(a)(4)(ii). The case was opened on 2017-06-28 and is reported as closed as of 2018-10-12. Proposed civil penalty: $36,200. Assessed civil penalty: $36,200. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

120171010_Final Order_09072018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_Final%20Order_09072018.pdf

120171010_Final Order_09072018_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_Final%20Order_09072018_text.pdf

120171010_NOPV PCP PCO_06282017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_06282017.pdf

120171010_NOPV PCP PCO_06282017_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_06282017_text.pdf

120171010_Operator Response to Notice_08102017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_08102017.pdf

120171010_Region Closure Confirmation Letter_12042018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_Region%20Closure%20Confirmation%20Letter_12042018.pdf

120171010_Region Closure Confirmation letter_12042018_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120171010/120171010_Region%20Closure%20Confirmation%20letter_12042018_text.pdf

120171010_Region Closure Confirmation letter_12042018_text.pdf

OVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY
December 4, 2018
Mr. Al Monaco
President and Chief Executive Officer
Enbridge, Inc.
5400 Westheimer Court
Houston, TX 77056
CPF 1-2017-1010
Dear Mr. Monaco:
On September 7, 2018, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
issued to Algonquin Gas Transmission Company, LLC a Final Order in the above-referenced case.
This Order included a Civil Penalty assessment. Based on 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,
Robert Burrough
Director, Eastern Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

120171010_NOPV PCP PCO_06282017_text.pdf

NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION
PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY
and
PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
OVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY
June 28, 2017
J. Andrew Drake,
Vice President, Operations & EHS
Algonquin Gas Transmission Company
5400 Westheimer Court
Houston, TX 77056
CPF 1-2017-1010
Dear Mr. Drake,
From December 8–14, 2016, representatives of the New York State Department of Public Service
(NYSDPS), acting as agents for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), inspected Algonquin Gas
Transmission Company’s (AGT) Algonquin Incremental Market (AIM) project in Brewster,
New York.
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. The items inspected and the
probable violation(s) are:
1. §192.167 Compressor stations: Emergency shutdown.
(a) Except for unattended field compressor stations of 1,000 horsepower
(746 kilowatts) or less, each compressor station must have an emergency
shutdown system that meets the following:
(4) It must be operable from at least two locations, each of which is:
…



CPF 1-2017-1010
(ii) Near the exit gates, if the station is fenced, or near emergency exits, if
not fenced; and, …
AGT failed to have an emergency shutdown system that was near the exit gates, if the station is
fenced, or near emergency exits, if not fenced. Specifically, AGT failed to install activation for its
emergency shutdown system at exit gates in the fenced Southeast Compressor station.
The AIM project was installed from October 2015 through December 2016. The AIM project
consisted of the installation of approximately 20.1 miles of 42-inch pipeline in New York State,
and modification of AGT’s existing compressor station in Brewster, NY (Southeast Compressor
Station). The Southeast Compressor Station modification consisted of the installation of a new
10,000 horsepower compressor and building to house the compressor.
During the final walkthrough on December 8, 2016, the NYSDPS inspector noted that the
Southeast Compressor station did not have activation for its emergency shut down system at the
fenced facility’s exit gates.
The Southeast Compressor station had eight exit gates: four exit gates for personnel and four exit
gates for vehicles. The station had an emergency shutdown system with activation points within
the facility. Activation points for the emergency shutdown system were not present near exit gates.
AGT stated that there are no activation points for the emergency shutdown system at station exit
gates.
Proposed Civil Penalty
As of April 27, 2017, under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $209,002 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of
$2,090,022 for a related series of violations. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the
circumstances and supporting documentation involved in the above probable violation(s) and has
recommended that you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $36,200 as follows:
Item number PENALTY
1 $36,200
Proposed Compliance Order
With respect to item(s) 1 pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Algonquin Gas Transmission
Company. 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
Compliance 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 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
120171010_NOPV PCP PCO_06282017_textPage 2 of 4



CPF 1-2017-1010
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.
Please submit all correspondence in this matter to Robert Burrough, Acting Director, PHMSA
Eastern Region, 820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103, West Trenton, NJ 08628. Please refer to
CPF 1- 2017-1010 on each document you submit, and whenever possible provide a signed PDF
copy in electronic format. Smaller files may be emailed to robert.burrough@dot.gov. Larger files
should be sent on a CD accompanied by the original paper copy to the Eastern Region Office.
Sincerely,
Robert Burrough
Acting Director, Eastern Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Cc: Kevin Speicher, NYS DPS
Enclosure: Proposed Compliance Order
Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings
120171010_NOPV PCP PCO_06282017_textPage 3 of 4



CPF 1-2017-1010
PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
Pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Algonquin Gas Transmission Company a
Compliance Order incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of
Algonquin Gas Transmission Company with the pipeline safety regulations:
1. 2. In regard to Item Number 1 of the Notice, AGT shall install emergency shutdown
system activation points near the exit gates of the Southeast Compressor station, in
accordance with the requirements of §192.167(a)(4), within 120 days of receipt of
the Final Order.
It is requested (not mandated) that Algonquin Gas Transmission Company maintain
documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this
Compliance Order and submit the total to Robert Burrough, Acting 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.
120171010_NOPV PCP PCO_06282017_textPage 4 of 4

120171010_Final Order_09072018_text.pdf

September 7, 2018
Mr. Al Monaco
President and Chief Executive Officer
Enbridge, Inc.
5400 Westheimer Court
Houston, TX 77056
Re: CPF No. 1-2017-1010
Dear Mr. Monaco:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case to your subsidiary,
Algonquin Gas Transmission Company, LLC (Algonquin). It makes a finding of violation and
assesses a civil penalty of $36,200. It further finds that Algonquin has completed the actions
specified in the Notice to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the civil penalty
has been paid, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by certified
mail is effective, as provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Alan K. Mayberry
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Robert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Mr. Rick Kivela, Manager, Operational Compliance, Enbridge, Inc.
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 )
Algonquin Gas Transmission Company, LLC, ) CPF No. 1-2017-1010
a subsidiary of Enbridge, Inc., )
)
)
)
Respondent. )
__________________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
From December 8-14, 2016, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives of the New York
State Department of Public Service (NYSDPS), as agent for 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 Algonquin Gas Transmission
Company, LLC’s (AGT or Respondent) Algonquin Incremental Market (AIM) project in
Brewster, New York. AGT is owned and operated by Enbridge, Inc.1 AGT operates
approximately 1,129 miles of pipeline in New England, with a capacity of approximately 3.08
billion cubic feet per day.2
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,
by letter dated June 28, 2017, 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 AGT had violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.167, and proposed assessing a civil
penalty of $36,200 for the alleged violation. The Notice also proposed ordering Respondent to
take certain measures to correct the alleged violation.
Enbridge, on behalf of AGT, responded to the Notice by letter dated August 10, 2017
(Response). The company did not contest the allegation, but 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 Spectra Energy Partners, LP website, available at http://www.spectraenergypartners.com/operations/natural-gas-
pipelines/algonquin-gas-transmission (last accessed August 7, 2018); Enbridge, Inc. website, available at
http://www.enbridge.com/media-center/news/details?id=2126823&lang=en&year=2017 (last accessed August 7,
2018).
2 Spectra Energy Partners, LP website, available at http://www.spectraenergypartners.com/operations/natural-gas-
pipelines/algonquin-gas-transmission (last accessed August 7, 2018).



CPF No. 1-2017-1010
Page 2
FINDING OF VIOLATION
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.167(a)(4)(ii), which states
in relevant part:
§ 192.167 Compressor stations: Emergency shutdown.
(a) Except for unattended field compressor stations of 1,000
horsepower (746 kilowatts) or less, each compressor station must have an
emergency shutdown system that meets the following:
(1) . . . .
(4) It must be operable from at least two locations, each of which is:
(i) . . . .
(ii) Near the exit gates, if the station is fenced, or near emergency exits,
if not fenced; . . .
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.167(a)(4)(ii) by failing to have an
emergency shutdown (ESD) system operable from at least two locations, each of which is near
the exit gates of a fenced compressor station. Specifically, the Notice alleged that AGT’s fenced
Southeast Compressor Station had an ESD with activations points within the facility, but not
near the exit gates.
The Notice stated that AGT’s AIM project was installed from October 2015 through December
2016 and consisted of approximately 20.1 miles of 42-inch pipeline in New York and
modification of AGT’s existing Southeast Compressor Station (Station) in Brewster, New York.
AGT installed a new 10,000-horsepower compressor and building to house the compressor at the
Station, which had eight exit gates - four for personnel and four for vehicles. During the final
walkthrough on December 8, 2016, the NYSDPS inspector noted that the Station did not have
activation for its ESD system at the fenced facility’s exit gates.
In its Response, Enbridge stated that “AGT is not contesting the finding of non-compliance,” yet
argued that a “finding of violation is not warranted” because there were 16 ESD activation points
at the Station, including 4 located approximately 60 to 135 feet from an exit gate. Respondent
also asserted “the number and locations of the ESD activation points at the time of the inspection
did not negatively impact safety.”3
AGT argued that § 192.167 does not specify the maximum distance between an ESD activation
point and a fence exit gate.4 While this is correct, the term “near” is commonly defined as “a
short distance” or “close to.”5 As stated in a previous PHMSA final order, “[t]his requirement is
intended to ensure that onsite personnel can activate the ESD System from a safe distance before
3 Response, at 2-3.
4 Id.
5 Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 13 Mar. 2018.



CPF No. 1-2017-1010
Page 3
leaving a compressor station in an emergency.”6 At the time of the NYSDPS inspection, the
nearest ESD activation point to an exit gate at the Station was 60 feet, which is not “a short
distance.” Even though the 16 ESD activation points were located near planned evacuation
routes, their distances from the exit gates would not necessarily prevent an employee from
having to “head back toward a hazardous area to activate the switches in the event of an
emergency.”7
Accordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.
§ 192.167(a)(4)(ii) by failing to have an emergency shutdown system operable from at least two
locations, each of which is near the exit gates of the fenced compressor station.
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
$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any
related series of violations.8
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; 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 $36,200 for the violation cited above.
Item 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $36,200 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.
§ 192.167(a)(4)(ii), for failing to have an emergency shutdown system operable from at least two
locations, each of which is near the exit gates of the fenced compressor station. With respect to
gravity, the Violation Report noted that the “[f]ailure to have an emergency shutdown system
near exit gates is a safety concern to all personnel entering the station.”9 AGT argued the
6 See, In the Matter of MoGas Pipeline, LLC, Final Order, C.P.F. No. 3-2011-1009 (Feb. 22, 2012) (available at
www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/enforcement/enforcement-overview).
7 Id., at 3. AGT acknowledged that § 192.167(a)(4)(i) requires at least ESD points to be operable outside “the gas
area of the station” and that an ESD activation point located outside a compressor building is not necessarily outside
“the gas area” that could ignite; however, that requirement is separate from the requirement of § 192.167(a)(4)(ii) at
issue here.
8 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See, e.g., Pipeline Safety: Inflation Adjustment of Maximum
Civil Penalties, 82 Fed. Reg. 19325 (April 27, 2017).
9 Pipeline Safety Violation Report (Violation Report) (March 9, 2017) (on file with PHMSA), at 11.



CPF No. 1-2017-1010
Page 4
proposed penalty was not warranted because the safety of the Southeast Compressor Station was
not compromised.10 AGT pointed out that there were 16 ESD activation points within the
Station located near planned emergency evacuation routes.11 However, I find Respondent failed
to comply with a requirement that was clearly applicable and this failure impacted safety. As
stated above, the nearest ESD activation point to an exit gate at the Station was 60 feet, which
did not ensure that onsite personnel could activate the ESD System from a safe distance before
leaving the compressor station in an emergency. The proposed penalty already takes into
consideration this information, and therefore, no further reduction to the penalty is warranted
under this factor.
The nature and circumstances of the violation were such that important equipment was missing
for a significant amount of time.12 With respect to the degree of Respondent’s culpability, the
Violation Report noted that the Southeast Compressor Station was originally constructed in 1986
and did not have ESD activation points near exit gates before the 2015 modifications. Even then,
AGT did not install ESD activation points near the exit gates as part of the 2015 AIM project.
Therefore, I find the nature and circumstances of the violation support the proposed penalty
amount. I also find Respondent is culpable for the violation because it failed to install ESD
activation points at the time of construction and during modifications to the station.
With respect to the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety
regulations, the Violation Report stated that AGT did not install the ESD activation points during
the original construction and AGT continued to operate the station without installing ESD
activation points at the exit gates.13 AGT noted that it has installed one new ESD activation
point and two new man gates. The new ESD activation point is approximately 11 feet from one
of the new man gates, and there is an ESD activation point approximately 19 feet from the other
new man gate.
Even though Respondent has now taken steps to comply with the requirement, it did so only after
learning of the probable violation. Respondent did not make a clear effort to comply with the
cited regulation when the violation occurred. Steps taken after PHMSA, or a State agent,
discovers a violation does not generally warrant a penalty reduction for good faith. Therefore, I
find AGT did not have a reasonable justification for its non-compliance and a penalty reduction
is not warranted.
Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess
Respondent a civil penalty of $36,200 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.167(a)(4)(ii).
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
10 Response, at 2.
11 Id.
12 Violation Report, at 9-10.
13 Id., at 13.



CPF No. 1-2017-1010
Page 5
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 $36,200 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. § 192.167(a)(4)(ii). 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 indicates that
Respondent has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance order:
1. With respect to the violation of § 192.167(a)(4)(ii) (Item 1), Respondent has
installed emergency shutdown system activation points near the exit gates of the
Southeast Compressor Station, in accordance with § 192.167(a)(4)(ii).
Accordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore,
the compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order.
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 terms and conditions of this Final Order are
effective upon service in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
September 7, 2018
___________________________________ __________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 24242