# CHATTANOOGA GAS CO — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 220123003
- **title:** CHATTANOOGA GAS CO — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2012-10-23
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 193.2625(a), 193.2625(b).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220123003.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220123003.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220123003
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/220123003
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving CHATTANOOGA GAS CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 193.2625(a),  193.2625(b). The case was opened on 2012-10-23 and is reported as closed as of 2013-08-28. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

220123003_closure letter_08282013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_closure%20letter_08282013.pdf

220123003_closure letter_08282013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_closure%20letter_08282013_text.pdf

220123003_Final Order_04222013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_Final%20Order_04222013.pdf

220123003_FinalOrder_04222013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_FinalOrder_04222013_text.pdf

220123003_NOPV_PCO_10232012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_NOPV_PCO_10232012.pdf

220123003_NOPV_PCO_10232012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_NOPV_PCO_10232012_text.pdf

220123003_Operator_response_11212012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220123003/220123003_Operator_response_11212012.pdf

220123003_FinalOrder_04222013_text.pdf

APRIL 22, 2013
Mr. Bryan Batson
President
Chattanooga Gas Company
10 Peachtree Place, NE
Atlanta, GA 30309
Mr. James Pitts
Vice President, Storage and Peaking Operations
AGL Resources, Inc.
1200 Smith Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
Re: CPF No. 2-2012-3003
Dear Mr. Batson and Mr. Pitts:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Chattanooga Gas Company to comply
with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the Compliance Order have been
completed, as determined by the Director, Southern 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. Wayne T. Lemoi, Director, Southern Region, OPS
Mr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS
Mr. Richard R. Lonn, Director, Compliance Assurance, Chattanooga Gas Company
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 )
)
Chattanooga Gas Company, ) CPF No. 2-2012-3003
a subsidiary of AGL Resources, Inc. )
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
From July 30 to August 1, 2012, 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 on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Chattanooga Gas
Company’s (CGC or Respondent) liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in Chattanooga,
Tennessee.
1 The Chattanooga LNG facility holds the equivalent of 1.2 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of
natural gas, is supplied by two pipelines, and delivers up to approximately 62,000 million cubic
feet (Mcf) per day to the Chattanooga Gas market.2
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southern Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated October 23, 2012, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed
finding that CGC had violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 193.2625(a) and 193.2625(b) and proposed ordering
Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations.
CGC responded to the Notice by letter dated November 21, 2012 (Response). The company did
not contest the allegations of violation, but provided information concerning the corrective
actions it had initiated. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right
to one.
1 CGC is a subsidiary of Atlanta based AGL Resources, Inc.
http://www.chattanoogagas.com/Universal/AboutUs.aspx (last visited April 4, 2013).
2 http://www.aglresources.com/about/LNG.aspx (last visited April 4, 2013).



2
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
In its Response, CGC did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part
193, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(a), which states:
§ 193.2625 Corrosion protection.
(a) Each operator shall determine which metallic components could,
unless corrosion is controlled, have their integrity or reliability adversely
affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during their
intended service life.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(a) by failing to determine
which metallic components could, unless corrosion is controlled, have their integrity or
reliability adversely affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during their intended
service life. Specifically, the Notice alleged that CGC did not determine that a 1.5-inch diameter
galvanized foam line designed to retard vaporization of spilled LNG in the event of a leak in the
LNG pump area could have its integrity or reliability adversely affected by corrosion prior to a
corrosion leak at the pipe-to-soil interface which occurred on August 23, 2010.
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. § 193.2625(a) by failing to determine
that a metallic component could, unless corrosion is controlled, have its integrity or reliability
adversely affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during its intended service life.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(b), which states:
§ 193.2625 Corrosion protection.
(a)…
(b) Components whose integrity or reliability could be adversely
affected by corrosion must be either—
(1) Protected from corrosion in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through
193.2635, as applicable; or
(2) Inspected and replaced under a program of scheduled maintenance
in accordance with procedures established under § 193.2605.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(b) by failing to protect a
component whose integrity or reliability could be adversely affected by corrosion from corrosion
in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through 193.2635, or inspect and replace the component under a
program of scheduled maintenance in accordance with procedures established under § 193.2605.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that CGC failed to protect the 1.5-inch diameter galvanized foam
line from corrosion or inspect and replace the component under a program of scheduled
maintenance and failed to inspect, protect from corrosion, and replace as necessary other areas of
the line and similar pipe-to-soil interfaces.



3
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. § 193.2625(b) by failing to protect the
1.5-inch galvanized foam line whose integrity or reliability could be adversely affected by
corrosion from corrosion in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through 193.2635, or inspect and
replace the component under a program of scheduled maintenance in accordance with procedures
established under § 193.2605.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a Compliance Order with respect to Items 1 and 2 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 193.2625(a) and 193.2625(b), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C.
§ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of LNG or who owns or operates a
pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under
chapter 601.
In its Response, CGC provided information concerning the corrective actions it has taken to
address the cited violations including replacing the below ground portion of the 1.5-inch
galvanized foam line and improved monitoring of metallic components. Having reviewed this
information, the Director has indicated that, among other things, Respondent has not submitted
the required analyses or copies of the amended procedures and therefore has not fully satisfied
the compliance terms.
As for the remaining compliance terms, 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 § 193.2625(a) (Item 1), Respondent must conduct
an analysis of all metallic components within the LNG Plant and identify which
metallic components could, unless corrosion is controlled, have their integrity or
reliability adversely affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during
their intended service life. The analysis must include consideration of potential
internal or atmospheric corrosion threats for components that are not normally in
service, such as the 1.5-inch galvanized foam line referred to in Item 1 of the Notice.
2. With respect to the violation of § 193.2625(b) (Item 2), Respondent must:
A. Inspect and, if required, replace the components identified as a result of the
analysis required by Item 1 above; and
B. Include in CGC’s manual(s) of written procedures measures it will take to
protect the components from corrosion in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through
193.2635, as applicable.



4
3. Complete Items 1 and 2 above within 60 days of receipt of this Order.
4. Provide written documentation to the Director demonstrating that Items 1 and 2
have been completed within 75 days of receipt of this Order.
5. It is requested (not mandated) that CGC 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 or revision of plans, procedures, studies, and
analyses; and (2) total cost associated with repairs, replacements, additions, and other
changes to physical pipeline facilities.
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 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.
The 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

220123003_closure letter_08282013_text.pdf

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
August 28, 2013
Mr. James Pitts
Vice President, Storage and Peaking Operations
AGL Resources
1200 Smith Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
CPF 2-2012-3003
Dear Mr. Pitts:
On April 22, 2013, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) issued to Chattanooga Gas Company (CGC) a Final Order in
the above-referenced case. The Final Order included an attached Compliance Order requiring
CGC to undertake certain actions to ensure compliance with the federal pipeline safety
regulations.
The OPS Southern Region has received and reviewed three written responses to the
Compliance Order from CGC including your last response dated August 23, 2013. Based on
our reviews of these responses we have determined that CGC has complied with the terms of
the Final Order. This case is now closed and no further action is necessary with respect to the
matters involved in this case.
Please be advised that this letter refers only to the above referenced order (CPF 2-2012-3003)
and not to any other OPS cases, if any.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Wayne T. Lemoi
Director, Office of Pipeline Safety
PHMSA Southern Region

220123003_Final Order_04222013.pdf

of Transportation
U.S. Department
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, D.C. 20590
Materials Safety
Pipeline and Hazardous
Administration
APR 22 2013
Mr. Bryan Batson
President
Chattanooga Gas Company
10 Peachtree Place, NE
Atlanta, GA 30309
Mr. James Pitts
Vice President, Storage and Peaking Operations
AGL Resources, Inc
1200 Smith Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
Re: CPF No. 2-2012-3003
Dear Mr. Batson and Mr. Pitts:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Chattanooga Gas Company to comply
with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the Compliance Order have been
completed, as determined by the Director, Southern 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
Mr. Wayne T. Lemoi, Director, Southern Region, OPS
Mr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS
Mr. Richard R. Lonn, Director, Compliance Assurance, Chattanooga Gas Company
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
Chattanooga Gas Company,
a subsidiary of AGL Resources, Inc.
CPF No. 2-2012-3003
Respondent.
FINAL ORDER
From July 30 to August 1, 2012, 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 on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Chattanooga Gas
Company's (CGC or Respondent) liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in Chattanooga,
Tennessee.' The Chattanooga LNG facility holds the equivalent of 1.2 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of
natural gas, is supplied by two pipelines, and delivers up to approximately 62,000 million cubic
feet (Mct) per day to the Chattanooga Gas market.?
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southern Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated October 23, 2012, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed
finding that had violated 49C... 1932625(a) and 193.2625(b) and proposed ordering
Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations.
CGC responded to the Notice by letter dated November 21, 2012 (Response). The company did
not contest the allegations of violation, but provided information concerning the corrective
actions it had initiated. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right
to one.
' CGC is a subsidiary of Atlanta based AGL Resources, Inc.
http://www.chattanoogagas.com/Universal/AboutUs.aspx (last visited April 4, 2013).
http://www.ag|resources.com/about/LNG.aspx (last visited April 4, 2013).



2
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
In its Response, CGC did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part
193, as follows:
Item I: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(a), which states:
§ 193.2625
Corrosion protection.
(a) Each operator shall determine which metallic components could,
unless corrosion is controlled, have their integrity or reliability adversely
intended service life.
affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during their
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(a) by failing to determine
which metallic components could, unless corrosion is controlled, have their integrity or
reliability adversely affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during their intended
service life. Specifically, the Notice alleged that CGC did not determine that a 1.5-inch diameter
galvanized foam line designed to retard vaporization of spilled LNG in the event of a leak in the
LNG pump area could have its integrity or reliability adversely affected by corrosion prior to a
corrosion leak at the pipe-to-soil interface which occurred on August 23, 2010.
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. § 193.2625(a) by failing to determine
that a metallic component could, unless corrosion is controlled, have its integrity or reliability
adversely affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during its intended service life.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(b), which states:
§ 193.2625
Corrosion protection.
(a)...
(b) Components whose integrity or reliability could be adversely
affected by corrosion must be either—
(1) Protected from corrosion in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through
193.2635, as applicable; or
(2) Inspected and replaced under a program of scheduled maintenance
in accordance with procedures established under § 193.2605.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2625(b) by failing to protect a
component whose integrity or reliability could be adversely affected by corrosion from corrosion
in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through 193.2635, or inspect and replace the component under a
program of scheduled maintenance in accordance with procedures established under § 193.2605.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that CC failed to protect the 1.5-inch diameter galvanized foam
line from corrosion or inspect and replace the component under a program of scheduled
maintenance and failed to inspect, protect from corrosion, and replace as necessary other areas of
the line and similar pipe-to-soil interfaces.



3
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. § 193.2625(b) by failing to protect the
1.5-inch galvanized foam line whose integrity or reliability could be adversely affected by
corrosion from corrosion in accordance with §$ 193.2627 through 193.2635, or inspect and
replace the component under a program of scheduled maintenance in accordance with procedures
established under § 193.2605.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a Compliance Order with respect to Items 1 and 2 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 193.2625(a) and 193.2625(b), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C.
§ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of LNG or who owns or operates a
pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under
chapter 601.
In its Response, CGC provided information concerning the corrective actions it has taken to
address the cited violations including replacing the below ground portion of the 1.5-inch
galvanized foam line and improved monitoring of metallic components. Having reviewed this
information, the Director has indicated that, among other things, Respondent has not submitted
the required analyses or copies of the amended procedures and therefore has not fully satisfied
the compliance terms.
As for the remaining compliance terms, 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 § 193.2625(a) (Item 1), Respondent must conduct
an analysis of all metallic components within the LNG Plant and identify which
metallic components could, unless corrosion is controlled, have their integrity or
reliability adversely affected by external, internal, or atmospheric corrosion during
their intended service life. The analysis must include consideration of potential
internal or atmospheric corrosion threats for components that are not normally in
service, such as the 1.5-inch galvanized foam line referred to in Item 1 of the Notice.
2. With respect to the violation of § 193.2625(b) (Item 2), Respondent must:
A. Inspect and, if required, replace the components identified as a result of the
analysis required by Item 1 above; and
B. Include in CG's manual(s) of written procedures measures it will take to
protect the components from corrosion in accordance with §§ 193.2627 through
193.2635, as applicable.



4
3. Complete Items 1 and 2 above within 60 days of receipt of this Order.
4. Provide written documentation to the Director demonstrating that Items 1 and 2
have been completed within 75 days of receipt of this Order.
5. It is requested (not mandated) that CC 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 or revision of plans, procedures, studies, and
analyses; and (2) total cost associated with repairs, replacements, additions, and other
changes to physical pipeline facilities.
The Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a
extension.
written request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an
Failure to comply with this Order may result in 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.
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49
C.F.R. § 190.5.
Sacre
APR 22 2013
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 22485