# SOUTHERN STAR CENTRAL GAS PIPELINE, INC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 12021037NOPV
- **title:** SOUTHERN STAR CENTRAL GAS PIPELINE, INC — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2021-06-17
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 191.5(a), 199.225(a)(1).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12021037nopv.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12021037nopv.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12021037nopv
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/12021037NOPV
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving SOUTHERN STAR CENTRAL GAS PIPELINE, INC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 191.5(a),  199.225(a)(1). The case was opened on 2021-06-17 and is reported as closed as of 2022-04-04. Proposed civil penalty: $46,200. Assessed civil penalty: $23,800. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

12021037NOPV_Decision on Petition for Reconsideration_04042022_(20-185140).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_Decision%20on%20Petition%20for%20Reconsideration_04042022_(20-185140).pdf

12021037NOPV_Decision on Petition for Reconsideration_04042022_(20-185140)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_Decision%20on%20Petition%20for%20Reconsideration_04042022_(20-185140)_text.pdf

12021037NOPV_Final Order_12092021_(20-185140).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_Final%20Order_12092021_(20-185140).pdf

12021037NOPV_Final Order_12092021_(20-185140)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_Final%20Order_12092021_(20-185140)_text.pdf

12021037NOPV_Operator Petition for Reconsideration_12232021_(20-185140).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_Operator%20Petition%20for%20Reconsideration_12232021_(20-185140).pdf

12021037NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_07062021_(20-185140).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_07062021_(20-185140).pdf

12021037NOPV_PCP_06172021_(20-185140).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_PCP_06172021_(20-185140).pdf

12021037NOPV_PCP_06172021_(20-185140)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12021037NOPV/12021037NOPV_PCP_06172021_(20-185140)_text.pdf

12021037NOPV_Final Order_12092021_(20-185140)_text.pdf

December 9, 2021
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: jimmy.staton@southernstar.com
Mr. Jimmy Staton
President and Chief Executive Officer
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
4700 State Route 56
Box 20010
Owensboro, Kentucky 42301
Re: CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Dear Mr. Staton:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation and assesses a civil penalty of $46,200. The penalty payment terms are set forth in the
Final Order. This enforcement action closes automatically upon receipt of payment. Service of
this decision by e-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. Robert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Mr. Shawn L. Patterson, Vice President and Chief Operations Officer, Southern Star
Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., shawn.patterson@southernstar.com
Mr. Craig Thomas, Manager, Integrity Management & PHMSA Compliance, Southern
Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., craig.thomas@southernstar.com
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 )
)
)
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., )
Respondent. )
_____________________________________)
) CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
FINAL ORDER
On July 1, 2020, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an
investigation following the June 30, 2020, incident at Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
(Southern Star or Respondent) in Blackwell, Oklahoma (Incident). Southern Star is a transporter
of natural gas, with approximately 5,800 miles of transmission pipeline in Missouri, Kansas,
Oklahoma, Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska, and Texas.1
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,
by letter dated June 17, 2021, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty
(Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Southern
Star violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 191.5(a) and 199.225(a)(1) and proposed assessing a civil penalty of
$46,200 for the alleged violations.
Southern Star responded to the Notice by letter dated July 6, 2021 (Response). Respondent
contested one of the allegations and offered additional information in response to the Notice.
Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 191 and 199, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(a), which states:
§ 191.5 Immediate notice of certain incidents.
(a) At the earliest practicable moment following discovery, but no later
than one hour after confirmed discovery, each operator must give notice in
1 About Southern Star, https://www.southernstar.com/about-us/ (last accessed November 16, 2021).



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 2
accordance with paragraph (b) of this section of each incident as defined in
§ 191.3.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(a) by failing to give notice of the
Incident at the earliest practicable moment following discovery, but no later than one hour after
confirmed discovery. Specifically, the Notice alleged that on June 30, 2020, Respondent was in
the process of relieving pressure at its Blackwell Storage Field when an employee was struck on
the back of the head. The employee was administered first aid while an ambulance was
dispatched, and the employee was later admitted to the hospital for head injuries. The Notice
alleged that Southern Star did not give notice in accordance with paragraph (b) of § 191.5 until
4:45 PM CDT on June 30, 2020, despite the Incident occurring around 12:23 PM CDT on June
30, 2020.
In its Response, Southern Star asserted that at the time of the Incident around 12:23 PM CDT on
June 30, 2020, the on-site personnel did not know the severity of the employee’s injury and
whether in-patient hospitalization would be required. Respondent argued that it complied with
§ 191.5 by giving notice after learning the hospital admitted the injured employee for
observation at 4:09 PM CDT on June 30, 2020.
I find Southern Star’s argument unpersuasive.
Pursuant to § 191.5, an operator must give notice no later than one hour after confirmed
discovery of each incident as defined in § 191.3.2 “Confirmed discovery” is defined as: “when it
can be reasonably determined, based on information available to the operator at the time a
reportable event has occurred, even if only based on a preliminary evaluation.”3
An operator’s obligation to report under § 191.5 is not dependent upon its confirmation that the
reporting criteria have been met.4 Rather, the relevant criteria for when an operator must report
are: whether an operator could know that a report is likely to be required after the event, and, if
so, whether it is able to collect the reportable information mandated by §191.5(b).5 This
mandated reporting allows the National Response Center (NRC) to obtain potentially critical
2 An “incident” means an event that involves a release of gas and that results in, among other things, personal injury
necessitating in-patient hospitalization. There is no dispute that the event in question meets the definition of an
incident as defined in § 191.3. See 49 C.F.R. § 191.3(1)(i).
3 49 C.F.R. § 191.3.
4 See The City of Richmond Virginia, CPF 1-2004-0006; 2006 WL 3825337, at *2 (January 12, 2006) (“…OPS
interprets ‘discovery’ to mean discovery of the incident itself, not discovery that the reporting criteria have been
met. Therefore, OPS requires pipeline operators to report incidents to the NRC at the earliest practicable moment
following discovery of the incident itself.”).
5 See Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation, CPF 4-2001-1003; 2005 WL 5010168, at *4 (May 5, 2005) (finding
that respondent’s report of a gas release 27 hours after it occurred was non-compliant with the reporting
requirements of § 191.5 because, less than two hours after it occurred, respondent could have estimated it would
likely need to be reported, based on the amount and cost of gas released, and respondent was able to collect the
minimal amount of information required to be reported).



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 3
information at the earliest practicable moment.6 OPS realizes that this may result in the NRC
receiving reports of events that are not required to be reported. If an operator determines through
later investigation that an event initially reported as an “incident” was not required to be
reported, it should, within 48 hours after the confirmed discovery of the incident, to the extent
practicable, revise its initial telephonic notice pursuant to the report submission requirements of
§ 191.7.7
The evidence shows that, around the time of the employee’s injury, Southern Star could know it
would likely need to make a report. The Incident occurred on June 30, 2020, around 12:23 PM
CDT, when Respondent’s employees were relieving excess pressure in Well 30 at Blackwell
Storage Field. During this work, one employee sustained blunt force trauma to the back of their
head from equipment used to relieve the pressure. On-site personnel determined around the time
of the injury that the employee necessitated transport to a hospital for medical attention. It is
reasonable that in-patient hospitalization would result therefrom. Southern Star was able to
collect the reportable information at the time of the employee’s injury, that is: the location of the
incident, time of the incident, number of injuries, the name of person reporting, and any other
significant facts known by the operator relevant to the cause of the incident or extent of the
damages.
Accordingly, after considering all of the evidence and the legal issue presented, I find
that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 191.5 by failing to give notice of the Incident at the earliest
practicable moment following discovery, but no later than one hour after confirmed discovery.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 199.225(a)(1), which states:
§ 199.225 Alcohol tests required.
Each operator must conduct the following types of alcohol tests for the
presence of alcohol.
(a) Post accident. (1) As soon as practicable following an accident, each
operator must test each surviving covered employee for alcohol if that
employee’s performance of a covered function either contributed to the
accident or cannot be completely discounted as a contributing factor to the
accident. The decision not to administer a test under this section must be
based on specific information that the covered employee’s performance had
no role in the cause(s) or severity of the accident.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 199.225(a)(1) by failing to conduct
required alcohol tests as soon as practicable following the Incident for employees performing
tasks that contributed to the Incident or those whose performance of a task cannot be completely
discounted as a contributing factor to the accident. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Southern
Star did not test two of its employees associated with the Incident.
6 See Public Service Company of New Mexico, CPF 44003; 1998 WL 35166483, at *2 (March 2, 1998) (stating that
the policy of early reporting requirements of §191.5 “allow[] the NRC to gather potentially critical information at
the earliest practicable moment,” even if it results in over-reporting).
7 See 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(c).



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 4
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Southern Star violated 49 C.F.R. § 199.225(a)(1) by failing to conduct
required alcohol tests as soon as practicable following the Incident for employees performing
tasks that contributed to the Incident or those whose performance of a task cannot be completely
discounted as a contributing factor to the accident.
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.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; 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 $46,200 for the violations cited above.
Item 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $22,400 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.
§ 191.5(a), for failing to give notice of the Incident at the earliest practicable moment following
discovery, but no later than one hour after confirmed discovery. Respondent contested the
allegation and the proposed penalty. For the reasons set forth above, I found Southern Star’s
argument for withdrawing the underlying item unpersuasive. Respondent did not set forth any
additional arguments for reduction of the proposed civil penalty. Considering the penalty
assessment factors, I find the proposed penalty appropriate for this violation. Specifically, the
nature of the violation related to Respondent’s failure to conduct an activity; the circumstances
were that the violation was discovered by PHMSA; the gravity recognized that safety was
minimally affected; culpability reflected Respondent failed to comply with an applicable
requirement; Respondent had a single prior offense; and good faith reflected that the operator did
not have a reasonable justification for the noncompliance. Accordingly, having reviewed the
record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $22,400 for
violation of 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(a).
Item 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $23,800 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.
§ 199.225(a)(1), for failing to conduct required alcohol tests as soon as practicable following the
Incident for employees performing tasks or those whose performance of a task cannot be
8 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 C.F.R. § 190.223.



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 5
completely discounted as a contributing factor to the accident. Southern Star neither contested
the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument justifying a reduction in the proposed
penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I
assess Respondent a civil penalty of $23,800 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 199.225(a)(1).
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 $46,200.
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 $46,200 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.
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 the
Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a brief 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 any
corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a
stay. If Respondent submits payment of the civil penalty, the Final Order becomes the final
administrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is waived.
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49
C.F.R. § 190.5.
December 9, 2021
___________________________________ __________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety

12021037NOPV_Decision on Petition for Reconsideration_04042022_(20-185140)_text.pdf

April 4, 2022
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: jimmy.staton@southernstar.com
Mr. Jimmy Staton
President and Chief Executive Officer
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
4700 State Route 56
Box 20010
Owensboro, Kentucky 42301
Re: CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Dear Mr. Staton:
Enclosed is the Decision on the Petition for Reconsideration issued in the above-referenced case.
For the reasons explained therein, the Decision grants your Petition. When the remaining civil
penalty has been paid, this enforcement action will automatically be closed. This Decision
constitutes the final administrative action in this proceeding. Service of this decision by
electronic mail is effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgment of receipt 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. Shawn L. Patterson, Vice President and Chief Operations Officer, Southern Star
Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., shawn.patterson@southernstar.com
Mr. Craig Thomas, Manager, Integrity Management & PHMSA Compliance, Southern
Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., craig.thomas@southernstar.com



Mr. Mark Luckett, Lead Attorney, Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.,
mark.luckett@southernstar.com
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 )
)
)
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., )
Respondent. )
______________________________________)
) CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
DECISION ON PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On July 1, 2020, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an
investigation following the June 30, 2020 incident at Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
(Southern Star or Respondent) in Blackwell, Oklahoma (Incident). Southern Star is a transporter
of natural gas, with approximately 5,800 miles of transmission pipeline in Missouri, Kansas,
Oklahoma, Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska, and Texas.1
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,
by letter dated June 17, 2021, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty
(Notice).2 In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Southern
Star violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 191.5(a) (Item 1) and 199.225(a)(1) (Item 2) and proposed assessing a
civil penalty of $46,200 for the alleged violations.3
Southern Star responded to the Notice by letter dated July 6, 2021 (Response).4 Respondent
contested the proposed finding in Item 1 that it violated § 191.5(a) and offered additional
information in response to the Notice.5 Respondent did not contest Item 2. Respondent did not
request a hearing and therefore waived its right to one.
1 About Southern Star, https://www.southernstar.com/about-us/ (last accessed March 7, 2022).
2 Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty, CPF No. 1-
2021-037-NOPV (Notice) (June 17, 2021) (on file with PHMSA).
3 Id., at 2-3.
4 Response to Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty, dated July 6, 2021 (Response) (on file with
PHMSA).
5 Id.



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 2
On December 9, 2021, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. §§ 60117 and 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.213,
PHMSA issued a final order finding that Responded violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 191.5(a) and
199.225(a)(1) (Final Order).6 Item 1 of the Final Order found that Southern Star violated
§ 191.5(a) by failing to give notice of the Incident at the earliest practicable moment following
discovery, but no later than one hour after confirmed discovery.7 Item 2 of the Final Order found
that Respondent violated § 199.225(a)(1) by failing to conduct required alcohol tests as soon as
practicable following the Incident for employees performing tasks that contributed to the
Incident or those whose performance of a task cannot be completely discounted as a contributing
factor to the Incident.8 The Final Order assessed a civil penalty of $46,200, pursuant to the
authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. §190.223.
On December 23, 2021, Southern Star filed a Petition for Reconsideration pursuant to 49 C.F.R.
§ 190.243 (Petition).9 In its Petition, Respondent requested reconsideration of Item 1 of the Final
Order.10 Respondent did not request reconsideration of Item 2 of the Final Order.
Standard of Review
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, a respondent may petition the Associate Administrator for
reconsideration of a final order that has been issued pursuant to §190.213. Reconsideration is
not an appeal or a completely new review of the record.11 A respondent may ask for correction
of an error or, in limited circumstances, may present previously unavailable information. If a
respondent requests consideration of additional facts or arguments, the respondent must submit
the reasons they were not presented prior to the issuance of the final order. The Associate
Administrator may grant or deny, in whole or in part, a petition for reconsideration without
further proceedings.
Discussion
Item 1: The Final Order found that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(a), which states:
§ 191.5 Immediate notice of certain incidents.
(a) At the earliest practicable moment following discovery, but no later
than one hour after confirmed discovery, each operator must give notice in
accordance with paragraph (b) of this section of each incident as defined in
§ 191.3.
6 Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., Final Order, CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV (Final Order) (December 9,
2021) (on file with PHMSA).
7 Id., at 1-3.
8 Id., at 3-4.
9 Petition for Reconsideration of Final Order, dated December 23, 2021 (Petition) (on file with PHMSA).
10 Id., at 3.
11 49 C.F.R. § 190.243(a)-(d).



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 3
The Final Order found that Southern Star violated 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(a) by failing to give notice
of the Incident at the earliest practicable moment following discovery, but no later than one hour
after confirmed discovery. The event occurred on June 30, 2020, around 12:23 PM CT, when
Respondent’s employees were relieving excess pressure in Well 30 at Blackwell Storage Field.
During this work, one employee sustained an injury to their head from equipment used to relieve
the pressure. On-site personnel determined around the time of the injury that the employee
necessitated transport to a hospital for medical attention. The employee was at the hospital for a
period of time before being admitted as an inpatient at 4:09 PM CT. Respondent notified the
National Response Center (NRC) at 4:45 PM CT, over four hours after the event occurred, but
less than one hour after being admitted.
In its Petition, Southern Star asserted that its staff at the time of the event could not immediately
know the extent of the employee’s “internal injuries,” took reasonable steps to monitor the
employee’s care at the hospital, and notified the NRC within one hour of the employee being
admitted to the hospital as an inpatient.12
Background
Pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 191.5(a), an operator must provide notice of certain incidents “at the
earliest practicable moment following discovery, but no later than one hour after confirmed
discovery.”13 Confirmed discovery means “when it can be reasonably determined, based on
information available to the operator at the time a reportable event has occurred, even if only
based on a preliminary evaluation.”14 Read together, § 191.5(a) requires operators to report
incidents at the earliest practicable moment, but no later than one hour after it can be reasonably
determined, based on the information available, that a reportable event has occurred, even if only
based on a preliminary evaluation.
This reporting requirement was adopted in 2017 at the direction of Congress. In the Pipeline
Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (Public Law 112–90), Congress
directed PHMSA to “establish time limits for telephonic or electronic notification of an accident
or incident to require such notification at the earliest practicable moment following confirmed
discovery of an accident or incident and not later than 1 hour following the time of such
confirmed discovery.”
On January 23, 2017, PHMSA published the rule “Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost
Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes.”15 In the rule,
PHMSA explained that the purpose of the revised notification requirement is to alert local, state,
12 Petition, supra, at 2-3.
13 As it pertains to the facts of this case, a reportable “incident” means an event that involves a release of gas from a
pipeline and results in personal injury necessitating inpatient hospitalization.
14 49 C.F.R. § 191.3.
15 82 FR 7972.



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 4
and federal agencies at the earliest practicable moment so that emergency personnel or
investigators can be dispatched quickly. Without this requirement, and under alternatives
proposed by commenters, each operator could have a different methodology that would
potentially take hours or days before an operator completed its evaluation and determined that an
accident or incident had in fact occurred. PHMSA noted that if an operator were allowed to wait
for a definitive confirmation, even where the operator already has sufficient evidence, the intent
of the Congressional mandate would be defeated. Accordingly, PHMSA explained that it was
adopting this reporting requirement, including the one-hour time limit and the definition of
“confirmed discovery,” to abide by the Congressional mandate requiring operators to report
incidents and accidents despite not having a complete assessment.
Analysis
In the present case, the Final Order found that on-site personnel determined around the time of
the injury that the employee necessitated transport to a hospital for medical attention. It was
therefore reasonable, the Final Order concluded, that inpatient hospitalization would result.
Accordingly, the Final Order determined Respondent was required to report the incident no later
than one hour after the injury occurred.
On reconsideration, I review whether Respondent should have determined, based on the
information available, that a reportable event had occurred, even if only based on a preliminary
evaluation. While Respondent decided the employee necessitated transport to the hospital for
medical attention, that decision alone may not necessarily provide enough information to
determine a reportable event has occurred. In some situations, it may be prudent to transport an
individual to a hospital for outpatient treatment of injuries that would not be expected to result in
inpatient hospitalization.
With that in mind, and recognizing Respondent’s staff at the time of the event could not ascertain
the extent of the employee’s internal injuries, I find reason to exercise enforcement discretion in
this matter and reduce the violation to a warning. Accordingly, the finding of violation is
withdrawn. If OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent
may be subject to future enforcement action.
The decision to exercise enforcement discretion in this matter is specific to the facts of this
incident. Unlike in the present case where Respondent’s staff could not ascertain the extent of
the injuries, there could be situations where an injury is so severe that the operator has enough
information to reasonably determine the necessity of inpatient hospitalization. In those
situations, the text of the regulation confirms the operator would be required to report such an
incident as soon as practicable but no later than one hour after it can be reasonably determined
that a reportable event has occurred, regardless of when admittance to the hospital actually
occurs.
Southern Star also made additional arguments for withdrawing the violation, including that
PHMSA’s interpretation creates ambiguity and that it would be inconsistent with a prior final



CPF No. 1-2021-037-NOPV
Page 5
order, In the Matter of the City of Richmond, Virginia.
16 Since the violation is withdrawn, it is
not necessary to address Respondent’s additional arguments for withdrawal.
Conclusion
After reconsidering the evidence of record, I find it appropriate to withdraw the finding of
violation in Item 1 of the Final Order. As such, the civil penalty assessed for Item 1 is also
withdrawn.
The Final Order also assessed a civil penalty of $23,800 for Item 2. Respondent did not seek
reconsideration of Item 2. Therefore, the civil penalty of $23,800 for Item 2 is now due.
Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days after receipt of this Decision. 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 $23,800 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 United
States District Court.
This Decision on Reconsideration is the final administrative action in this proceeding.
April 4, 2022
___________________________________ __________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
16 Petition, supra, at 2 (citing In the Matter of the City of Richmond, Virginia, CPF 1-2004-0006; 2006 WL 3825337
(January 12, 2006)). PHMSA notes City of Richmond was issued before PHMSA adopted the more stringent
reporting requirement and definition of “confirmed discovery” that exist today.
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 32698