{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32021046NOPV","title":"TALLGRASS PONY EXPRESS PIPELINE, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2021-11-23","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.310(a), 195.402(a), 195.406(b), 195.440(g), 195.452(b)(4)(i), 195.452(f), 195.452(l)(1)(ii), 195.573(a)(1), 195.573(c), 195.577(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32021046nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32021046nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32021046nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32021046NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving TALLGRASS PONY EXPRESS PIPELINE, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.310(a),  195.402(a),  195.406(b),  195.440(g),  195.452(b)(4)(i),  195.452(f),  195.452(l)(1)(ii),  195.573(a)(1),  195.573(c),  195.577(a). The case was opened on 2021-11-23 and is reported as closed as of 2022-11-03. Proposed civil penalty: $437,300. Assessed civil penalty: $385,500. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32021046NOPV_Closure Letter_11032022_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_Closure%20Letter_11032022_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_Closure Letter_11032022_(20-172259)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_Closure%20Letter_11032022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_Consent Agreement and Order_05102022_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_05102022_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_Consent Agreement and Order_05102022_(20-172259)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_05102022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_Op Resp to Notice and Req for Hearing and Statement of Issues (Part 1)_01212022_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_Op%20Resp%20to%20Notice%20and%20Req%20for%20Hearing%20and%20Statement%20of%20Issues%20(Part%201)_01212022_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_Op Resp to Notice and Req for Hearing and Statement of Issues (Part 2)_01212022_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_Op%20Resp%20to%20Notice%20and%20Req%20for%20Hearing%20and%20Statement%20of%20Issues%20(Part%202)_01212022_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_PCP PCO_11232021_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_PCP%20PCO_11232021_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_PCP PCO_11232021_(20-172259)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_PCP%20PCO_11232021_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_PHC Hearing Canceled_06022022_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Canceled_06022022_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_PHC Hearing Canceled_06022022_(20-172259)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Canceled_06022022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_PHC Hearing Scheduled_02072022_(20-172259).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Scheduled_02072022_(20-172259).pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_PHC Hearing Scheduled_02072022_(20-172259)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021046NOPV/32021046NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Scheduled_02072022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\n32021046NOPV_Closure Letter_11032022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: bill.moler@tallgrassenergylp.com;\njennifer.eckels@tallgrassenergylp.com; brad.armsbury@tallgrassenergylp.com;\ncrystal.heter@tallgrassenergylp.com;\nNovember 3, 2022\nWilliam Moler\nChief Executive Officer\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\n4200 W. 115th St. Suite 350\nLeawood, KS 66211\nRE: CPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nDear Mr. Moler:\nOn May 10, 2022, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued\na Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement between PHMSA and\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC (Tallgrass) in the above-referenced case. This Order\nincluded a Civil Penalty assessment and Compliance Order requirement for Tallgrass to take\ncorrective actions on its pipeline.\nBased on our review of the documentation provided by Tallgrass and confirmation of payment of\nthe civil penalty on May 13, 2022, it has been determined that Tallgrass has complied with the\nterms of this Order.\nAccordingly, this case is now closed, and no further action is contemplated with respect to the\nmatters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nGregory A. Ochs\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Jennifer Eckles, Director Compliance, jennifer.eckels@tallgrassenergylp.com\nCrystal Heter, Chief Operating Officer, crystal.heter@tallgrassenergylp.com\n\n32021046NOPV_Op Resp to Notice and Req for Hearing and Statement of Issues (Part 2)_01212022_(20-172259).pdf\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nIn the Matter of )\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC, ) CPF No. 3-2021-046-NOPV\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n__________________________________________)\nREQUEST FOR INFORMAL CONFERENCE, REQUEST FOR HEARING AND\nPRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF ISSUES FOR NOPV ITEMS 5 AND 6\nWRITTEN RESPONSE TO NOPV ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, AND 10\nI. Request for Informal Conference Regarding NOPV Items 5 and 6\nPursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117(b)(1)(B), Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC (Tallgrass)\nrespectfully requests an informal meeting to discuss the allegations in Items 5 and 6 of the above-\nreferenced Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order\n(NOPV). Tallgrass is hopeful that through further discussion of the facts and circumstances around\nItems 5 and 6 that these portions of the NOPV can be addressed without a hearing.\nII. Request for Hearing Regarding NOPV Items 5 and 6\nPursuant to 49 C.F.R. §§ 190.208(a)(4) and 190.211(b), Tallgrass respectfully requests an\nin-person hearing to discuss the alleged violation and proposed civil penalties for Items 5 and 6. If\na hearing is held, Tallgrass will be represented by counsel at the hearing.\nIII. Preliminary Statement of Issues\nTallgrass respectfully contests the allegations of violation and proposed civil penalties for\nItems 5 and 6, concerning the Company’s Integrity Management Program. At the hearing,\nTallgrass intends to raise the following issues:\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nItem 5 – 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.452(b)(4)(i) and 195.452(f)(6) – Identification of Preventive\nand Mitigative Measures\nA. Whether, based on the allegation in the Notice and evidence in the record, PHMSA met\nits burden of proof and persuasion that Tallgrass committed a probable violation of 49\nC.F.R. §§ 195.452(b)(4)(i) and 195.452(f)(6).\nB. Whether Tallgrass can present evidence that it had a process for identifying preventive\nand mitigative measures to protect its facilities, as well as documentation that that\nprocess was implemented.\nC. Whether the proposed penalty must be withdrawn.\nItem 6 – 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(l)(1)(ii) – Documentation of Information Analysis\nA. Whether, based on the allegation in the Notice and evidence in the record, PHMSA met\nits burden of proof and persuasion that Tallgrass committed a probable violation of 49\nC.F.R. §§ 195.452(l)(1)(ii).\nB. Whether Tallgrass can present evidence that it documented its information analyses\nunder §§ 195.452(g) and 195.452(l)(1)(ii), including the integration of Pipe Evaluation\nReports in the information analysis, and also into other aspects of its Integrity\nManagement Program.\nC. Whether the proposed penalty must be withdrawn.\nTallgrass reserves the right to supplement this preliminary statement of issues in response\nto any additional information or arguments from PHMSA.\nIV. Written Response to NOPV Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10\nPursuant to 49 C.F.R. §§ 190.208(a)(2), 190.208(a)(3) and 190.208(b)(3) Tallgrass\nprovides the following written response to Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the NOPV.\nA. Item 1 – 49 C.F.R. § 195.310(a)\nTallgrass respectfully contests this alleged probable violation. Tallgrass has complete\ndocumentation of the pressure test for Tank 3400 at the Natoma Kansas station. PHMSA alleged\nthat Tallgrass did not provide records in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 195.307 and API Std 650,\nSections 7.3.5. and 7.3.6. Specifically, PHMSA asserts that Tank 3400 “did not have a record of\n2\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nfill level or test duration to confirm the pressure of the hydrotest after construction.” However,\nTallgrass does in fact have records of these parameters.\nTallgrass is contesting this violation. API 650 Section 7.3.5 Testing of the Shell 7.3.6\nHydrostatic Testing Requirements requires the following criteria for a hydrostatic test of a tank:\n7.3.5 Testing of the Shell\nAfter the entire tank and roof structure is completed, the shell (except for the shell of tanks\ndesigned in accordance with Annex F) shall be strength-tested and the foundation initially\nloaded by one of the following methods, as specified on the Data Sheet, Line 14:\n1. If water is available for testing the shell, the tank shall be filled with water as\nfollows: (1) to the maximum design liquid level, H; …….the tank shall be\ninspected frequently during the filling operation……..\n7.3.6 Hydrostatic Testing Requirements\n7.3.6.5\n1. Shell elevation measurements shall be made at equally-spaced intervals around\nthe tank circumference not exceeding 10 m (32 ft). The minimum number of shell\nmeasurement points shall be eight.\n2. Observed elevations shall be referred to a permanent benchmark. The level\ninstrument shall be set up at least 1 1/2 times tank diameter away from the tank\nwhen tank elevation readings are taken. Six sets of settlement readings are\nrequired:\na. Before start of the hydrostatic test;\nb. With tank filled to 1/4 test height (±600 mm [2 ft]);\nc. With tank filled to 1/2 test height (±600 mm [2 ft]);\nd. With tank filled to 3/4 test height (±600 mm [2 ft]);\ne. At least 24 hours after the tank has been filled to the maximum test height.\nThis 24-hour period may be increased to duration specified on the data sheet if\nthe Purchaser so requires for conditions such as:\ni. The tank is the first one in the area,\nii. The tank has a larger capacity than any other existing tank in the area,\niii. The tank has a higher unit bearing load than any other existing tank in\nthe area,\niv. There is a question regarding the rate or magnitude of settlement that\nwill take place;\nf. After tank has been emptied of test water.\n3\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nWith respect to the specific inadequacies alleged in the NOPV, Tallgrass provides the following\ninformation:\nFill Height and Elevation Measurements: During the inspection, Tallgrass provided\nthe document titled Hydrotest Survey Natoma KS 2017-12-21 which indicated that the\nrequired elevation measurements were taken at all six (6) fill heights described in API\n650 Section 7.3.6.5(b) above, and at a distance around the tank not exceeding 10 m (32\nft.) as required by API 650 Section 7.3.7.5(a). Tallgrass has included Natoma KS 2017-\n12-21 in Attachment 1 to this response.\nTest Duration: During the inspection, Tallgrass provided the tank inspector’s reports\nfrom December 1, 2017 through to December 5, 2017, which list the start of the test, the\ndates and times that the 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 and full levels were reached, when the 24-hour hold\nbegan and concluded, when the tank was emptied, and an indication that no leaks were\ndiscovered as required by API 650 Section 7.3.6. Tallgrass has included the tank\ninspector’s reports in Attachment 1 to this response.\nTest Pressures: PHMSA alleges that Tallgrass failed to confirm the pressure of the\nhydrotest. However, Natoma Tank 3400 is an atmospheric pressure tank and was\ntherefore hydrostatically tested with a water fill at atmospheric pressure as required by\nAPI 650. No pressure measurements are required for an atmospheric tank test. Tallgrass\nhas included a photograph of the tank nameplate in Attachment 1 to this response. This\nphotograph shows that Tank 3400 is an atmospheric pressure tank.\nBased on the foregoing, and the records included in Attachment 1, Tallgrass respectfully\nrequests that PHMSA withdraw this Item. While this is a warning item, failure to withdraw it\nwould result in a factual error in the public record. This factual error, if allowed to persist, could\nhave harmful effects on Tallgrass in its future dealings with the public, third parties and\nregulatory agencies.\nTallgrass also notes that since the inspection, in the spirit of continual improvement,\nTallgrass has created a new form to capture and centralize key information from tank pressure\ntest documentation.\nB. Items 2 and 10 – 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.402(a) and 195.577(a)\nItems 2 and 10 are warning items that relate to external corrosion control. With respect\nto Item 2, Tallgrass offers the clarification that it discovered in a 2019 cathodic protection (CP)\nsystem survey that certain decouplers on the NECL were malfunctioning. Tallgrass corrected the\nissue and CP system potentials were elevated and met criteria within 15-months. With respect to\nItem 10, Tallgrass wishes to clarify that there is no stray current interference on the NECL\npipeline. Instead, the NECL pipeline had a larger CP current requirement to achieve protection.\n4\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nC. Item 3 – 49 C.F.R. § 195.406(b)\nTallgrass respectfully requests that PHMSA eliminate two instances of the alleged\noverpressure violation and reduce the civil penalty for a variety of reasons. Each of the instances\nof violation is set out below, along with additional information and explanation. Following the\ndiscussion of each instance, Tallgrass provides explanation in support of a penalty reduction for\nthis Item.\n1. 130% MOP on 08-04-18 for NECL North line at the Noble meter skid due to\npower loss and ESD at Buckingham (ERL 1356, 1357, 1358).\nTallgrass respectfully requests that PHMSA remove this instance from the alleged\nviolation. The Emergency Response Line (ERL) notification for this event indicated that this\nwas a pressure exceedance of 130% MOP. ERLs are issued quickly in response to an undesired\nevent, and before any detailed investigation occurs. Upon further investigation Tallgrass\ndetermined that an alarm had been set to trip based on an ANSI 150 class system, instead of the\nactual, higher 450 psig MOP at the Noble meter skid. The Noble meter skid is all ANSI 300\nrated and Tallgrass has set MOP to 450 psig based on station hydraulics. The pressure at the\nNoble meter reached approximately 370 psig, below the 450 psig MOP at this location. As a\nresult, what appeared initially to be an MOP exceedance was not, in fact, an exceedance.\nTallgrass has reset the alarm to reflect the correct 450 psig MOP for the Noble meter skid.\nPlease see Attachment 2 for documentation of the 450 psig MOP at the Noble meter skid,\nand a graph of the pressures during the event that shows the 450 psig MOP was never exceeded.\nOn the basis of these materials, Tallgrass requests that PHMSA remove this instance of violation\nfrom Item 3 and reduce the number of instances of violation for this Item for purpose of\ncalculating the civil penalty under the gravity factor.\n2. 115% MOP on 07-26-19 during startup on PXP North (ERL 1679).\nTallgrass does not contest this instance of the alleged violation. However, Tallgrass\nrequests that PHMSA provide a reduction in the civil penalty related to this allegation to reflect\nthat Tallgrass identified the causes of the problem and corrected them before the start of\nPHMSA’s inspection in August 2020. Specifically, Tallgrass installed relief at Guernsey station\nto prevent future overpressure events.\nPlease see Attachment 2 for the point-to-point verification that was conducted on the new\nsafety relief valve (SRV) installed in April of 2020. This documentation demonstrates that\nTallgrass corrected the problem before PHMSA’s inspection. On the basis of these materials,\nTallgrass requests that PHMSA provide a credit under the gravity assessment criteria, as more\nfully described below, in the penalty section.\n5\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\n3. 114% MOP on 10-10-19 at Pawnee due to shut down of Hereford Ranch\nLateral, no surge relief (ERL 1773).\nTallgrass does not contest this instance of the alleged violation. However, Tallgrass\nrequests that PHMSA provide a reduction in the civil penalty related to this allegation to reflect\nthat Tallgrass identified the causes of the problem and corrected them before the start of\nPHMSA’s inspection in August 2020. Specifically, Tallgrass installed a control valve and relief\nsystem at the Pawnee station to prevent future overpressure events.\nPlease see Attachment 2 for the point-to-point verification that was conducted on the new\nrelief valve in May of 2020. This documentation demonstrates that Tallgrass corrected the\nproblem before PHMSA’s inspection. On the basis of these materials, Tallgrass requests that\nPHMSA provide a credit under the gravity factor, as more fully described below, in the penalty\nsection.\n4. 113% MOP on 3-18-20 at McPherson Lateral due to control valve failure\n(ERL 2018).\nTallgrass respectfully requests that PHMSA remove this instance from the alleged\nviolation. The ERL notification for this event indicated that this was a pressure exceedance of\n113% MOP. ERLs are issued quickly in response to undesired events, and before any detailed\ninvestigation occurs. Upon further investigation Tallgrass determined that the MOP exceedance\nonly reached 102%, which is below the 110% MOP limit under § 195.406(b). The actual\npressure reached 291 psig, and the MOP at this location is 285 psig. Tallgrass has relief in place\nat this location to prevent the pressure from exceeding the § 195.406(b) limit.\nPlease see Attachment 2 for a SCADA record that shows that the highest pressure\nreached during the March 18, 2020, event was 291 psig, in reference to the High and High-High\nalarms denoted by the red dashed horizontal lines. The High-High is set at 99% MOP, which\nequates to 282 psig.\nOn the basis of these materials, Tallgrass requests that PHMSA remove this instance of\nviolation from Item 3 and reduce the number of instances of violation for this Item for purpose of\ncalculating the civil penalty under the Gravity factor.\n5. 114.5% MOP on 6-25-20 at Hereford Lateral/Pawnee due to unintended\nclosure of control valve (ERL 2180)\nTallgrass does not contest this instance of the alleged violation. Tallgrass requests\nadjustment of the civil penalty related to this instance under the gravity factor, as discussed\nbelow.\nPenalty Reduction for Item 3\nTallgrass respectfully requests that PHMSA reduce the proposed penalty for Item 3 on\nthe basis of the factual information described above and supported in the attached\n6\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\ndocumentation. Tallgrass seeks a penalty reduction under the gravity, culpability, and as justice\nmay require factors at 49 C.F.R. §§ 190.225(a)(1), 190.225(a)(2) and 190.225(b)(2),\nrespectively.\nFirst, as explained above, Tallgrass undertook further investigation of the 5 events\ndescribed above. As a result of that investigation, the Company determined that 2 of the 5 events\ndid not in fact result in an exceedance of 110% MOP, and therefore do not constitute violations\nof § 195.406(b). On that basis, Tallgrass requests that PHMSA reduce the number of instances\nof violation from 5 to 3 in the gravity section of the Proposed Civil Penalty Worksheet. Based\non that reduction, PHMSA should reduce the “additional gravity points for multiple instances of\nviolation” from 13.6 to 6.8. It is evident from other entries in PHMSA’s Proposed Civil Penalty\nWorksheet that the agency ascribes 6.8 gravity points to a violation involving 3 instances of\nviolation.1 At a point value of $1,728, this instance-based gravity reduction should be $11,750.\nSecond, and also with respect to the gravity factor, PHMSA’s Proposed Civil Penalty\nWorksheet adds 17 gravity points based on an assertion in the Violation Report that the\n“violation occurred within an HCA or ‘could affect’ HCA.”2 This assertion appears to be based\non a statement from PHMSA’s Violation Report that “all Tallgrass pipelines in the system\ncontain HCA segments.\n”3 Tallgrass has evaluated its HCA listings and determined that the\nfacilities where these events took place were not located in, nor could they affect an HCA.\nDocumentation demonstrating the non-HCA status of these facilities is contained in Attachment\n3. None of the stations is listed in the attached HCA listings because none are in or could affect\nan HCA. In addition, regarding PHMSA’s concern that the events at these locations could have\nresulted in overpressures on connected pipeline segments that are in HCAs, all of the events only\naffected station piping and none resulted in overpressure of mainline piping. As demonstrated in\nthe table below, the MOPs of the mainlines serving these stations is far above the MOP of the\nstation piping.\nStation Station Piping\nMOP (psig)\nMainline\nMOP (psig)\nNoble Meter (NECL) 450 1440\nGuernsey South Terminal\n(PXP North)\n285 1440\nPawnee (Hereford Lateral) 285 1440\nMcPherson 285 1440\nOn this basis, Tallgrass requests that PHMSA reduce the gravity points from 17 to 7,\nwhich should result in an additional reduction of $17,280. This adjustment is reasonable and\nappropriate because none of the locations identified are an HCA facility. This adjustment also\nreflects that no mainline HCA piping experienced an MOP exceedance as a result of the station\npiping exceedances at these facilities.\n1 PHMSA Proposed Civil Penalty Worksheet, Columns for Items 5 and 6, depict 3 instances of violation, each with\nadditional gravity points of 6.8.\n2 PHMSA Proposed Civil Penalty Worksheet, gravity section; PHMSA Violation Report at 15.\n3 PHMSA Violation Report at 15.\n7\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nThird, with respect to the culpability factor, PHMSA provides up to a -15 point credit in\ncircumstances where an operator finds and fixes issues before a PHMSA inspection.\n4\nSpecifically, such a credit is appropriate if “[a]fter the operator found the non-compliance, the\noperator took documented action to address the cause of the non-compliance, and corrected the\nnon-compliance before PHMSA learned of the violation.”5 As explained above, Tallgrass\nundertook and completed corrective action with respect to two6 of the three remaining instances\nof violation before the inspection, and therefore the penalty should be reduced accordingly.\nGiven these efforts, PHMSA should provide a -10 point reduction under the culpability factor.\nAt a $1,728 point value, this results in an additional reduction of $17,280.\nFinally, PHMSA has assigned 40 additional points under the “as justice may require”\nfactor, due to a repeat offense from a 2016 Final Order. Tallgrass does not contest that this is a\nrepeat offense. However, this 40-point assignment is based on an underlying 17-point gravity\nscore. As discussed above, because none of the overpressure events occurred in an HCA or a\ncould affect area, that gravity score must drop from 17 to 7 points. Based on the point ranges for\nrepeat offenses in PHMSA’s Proposed Civil Penalty Worksheet, the “as justice may require”\nscore should also drop, from 40 to 30 points. This adjustment results in an additional $17,280\nreduction in the civil penalty.\nBased on the various appropriate penalty adjustments described above, the civil penalty\nfor this item should be adjusted from $151,300 to $87,710.\nProposed Compliance Order for Item 3\nTallgrass requests that PHMSA clarify the Proposed Compliance Order to reflect that\nTallgrass may prevent MOP exceedance using a range of “adequate controls and\nprotective equipment,” pursuant to § 195.406(b), and not only surge relief devices as presently\nspecified in the Proposed Compliance Order.\nD. Item 4 - 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(g)\nTallgrass respectfully requests that PHMSA convert this alleged violation into a Notice of\nAmendment (NOA). Tallgrass acknowledges that it needs to improve its program for\ncommunicating with non-English speakers. The Company intends to update its procedures\nconcerning determination of what is a “significant” non-English speaking population. And\nreflecting PHMSA’s concerns, Tallgrass will rely on Spanish language mailers, instead of just the\nSpanish language content on its website. PHMSA has the discretion to change this item to an\nNOA and given the procedure-focused nature of PHMSA’s concern, doing so would be\nreasonable.\n4 PHMSA Proposed Civil Penalty Worksheet, culpability section.\n5 Id.\n6 In the second and third instances of violation, 115% MOP on 07-26-19 during startup on PXP North (ERL 1679)\nand 114% MOP on 10-10-19 at Pawnee due to shut down of Hereford Ranch Lateral, no surge relief (ERL 1773),\nTallgrass corrected the issue through installation of equipment and other actions at these locations. And did so\nbefore PHMSA began its inspection in August 2020.\n8\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nE. Items 7, 8, and 9 – 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.573(a)(1) and 195.573(c)\nThe above-listed Items all relate to Tallgrass’ 2020 self-report of external corrosion\ncontrol survey and data issues. Tallgrass does not contest these Items. However, Tallgrass\nrespectfully requests that the Final Order in this case reflect the Company’s proactive efforts\nto resolve the underlying issues and improve its practices and procedures. Those efforts are\nsummarized below.\nAs listed in detail in the Company’s self-report communications, after discovering these\nissues, Tallgrass took steps to verify that they did not present safety concerns. Specifically,\nTallgrass conducted un-planned close interval surveys (CIS) and reads of cathodic\nprotection (CP) test stations, as well as an analysis of In-Line Inspection and other inspection and\nrepair data on affected pipeline segments. The results of these efforts confirmed that there were\nno immediate corrosion-related safety concerns. Tallgrass then began several remedial actions to\nprevent recurrence of the corrosion survey and data issues, including additional training,\nimproved corrosion data collection and tracking tools, review and amendment of relevant\ncorrosion procedures, establishment of an annual corrosion program performance review\nmeeting, quarterly data reviews, addition of personnel, and additional CIS and CP\nsystem improvements.\nTallgrass shares PHMSAs commitment to pipeline safety and appreciates being\nafforded the opportunity to work with PHMSA to ensure the safe operation of our pipelines.\nPlease do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about this response. I will contact\nyou to discuss scheduling an informal conference regarding Items 5 and 6.\nRespectfully submitted this 21st day of\nJanuary 2022.\nJennifer Eckels\nManager - Compliance\n370 Van Gordon Street\nLakewood, CO 80228\nPhone: (303) 763-3486\nCC: Tallgrass: Byron Gale, Jay Meyers, Jarid Kling, Nicole Longwell, Crystal Heter\nPHMSA: Gabe Hodill, AJ McKean\nEnclosures: Attachment 1:\nNatoma Terminal Tank 3400 Hydrotest Fill Height and Elevation\nMeasurements\nNatoma Terminal Tank 3400 Tank Inspector’s Report 12/1/2017\n9\n\n\n\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF 3-2021-046-NOPV\nNatoma Terminal Tank 3400 Tank Inspector’s Report 12/2/2017\nNatoma Terminal Tank 3400 Tank Inspector’s Report 12/3/2017\nNatoma Terminal Tank 3400 faceplate\nAttachment 2:\nSCADA Record of Actual Pressure Reached and Setpoint on 08/04/2018\nand Management of Change Notification (Noble Meter)\nPoint-to-Point Record Confirming Installation of Safety Relief Valve\n(Guernsey)\nPoint-to-Point Record Confirming Installation of Safety Relief Valve\n(Pawnee)\nSCADA record of Actual Pressure Reached and Setpoint on 03/18/2020\n(McPherson)\nAttachment 3:\n2019 & 2020 Facility Equipment Maintenance Plans (listing HCA facilities)\n10\n\n32021046NOPV_PHC Hearing Scheduled_02072022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\nFebruary 7, 2022\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: jennifer.eckels@tallgrassenergylp.com and\ngregory.ochs@dot.gov\nMs. Jennifer Eckels\nManager – Compliance\nTallgrass Energy, LP\n370 Van Gordon Street\nLakewood, CO 80228\nMr. Gregory Ochs\nDirector, Central Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n901 Locust Street, Suite 480\nKansas City, MO 64106-2641\nRe: Notice of Hearing, Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\nCPF No. 3-2021-046-NOPV\nDear Ms. Eckels and Mr. Ochs:\nIn accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.211, an informal hearing will be held regarding the Notice of\nProbable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order issued by the Pipeline\nand Hazardous Materials Safety Administration in the above-referenced case. The hearing will take\nplace on May 4, 2022, beginning at 8:30 a.m. Central Time.\nThe hearing will be held via videoconference. I will provide the videoconference information prior\nto the hearing. At least 10 calendar days prior to the hearing (or by April 25, 2022), both parties\nmust submit and exchange any additional written materials they intend to present at the hearing and\nthe name and email address of each attendee. This information should be provided electronically.\nMaterials not submitted by this date may be excluded.\nIf you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.\nSincerely,\nLarry White\nPresiding Official\ncc: Mr. William Moler, Chief Executive Officer, Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC,\nbill.moler@tallgrassenergylp.com\nMr. Joseph Hainline, Counsel, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety,\njoseph.hainline@dot.gov\n\n32021046NOPV_Consent Agreement and Order_05102022_(20-172259)_text.pdf\n\nMay 10, 2022\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: bill.moler@tallgrassenergylp.com\nMr. William Moler\nChief Executive Officer\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\n4200 W. 115th Street, Suite 350\nLeawood, Kansas 66211\nCPF No. 3-2021-046-NOPV\nDear Mr. Moler:\nEnclosed please find a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement\nbetween the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Tallgrass\nPony Express Pipeline, LLC (Tallgrass), which was executed on May 10, 2022. Service of the\nConsent Order and Consent Agreement by electronic mail is deemed effective upon the date of\ntransmission and acknowledgement of receipt, or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nSincerely,\nAlan K Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosures: Consent Agreement and Consent Order\nCc: Mr. Gregory Ochs, Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMs. Catherine Little, outside counsel for Tallgrass, catherine.little@troutman.com\nMs. Jennifer Eckels, Compliance Manager, Tallgrass, jennifer.eckels@tallgrass.com\nCONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUESTED\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n____________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC, ) CPF No. 3-2021-046-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nCONSENT ORDER\nBy letter dated November 23, 2021, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,\nOffice of Pipeline Safety (PHMSA), issued a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil\nPenalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice) to Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC\n(Tallgrass or Respondent).\nIn response to the Notice, Respondent contested the underlying allegations for Items 1, 5, and 6;\noffered additional information regarding the facts underlying Items 2 and 10; requested a\nreduction of the instances of violation for Item 3 along with a corresponding reduction to the\nproposed civil penalty, and modification of the proposed compliance order; requested conversion\nof Item 4 to a Notice of Amendment; and requested additional language be added to the Final\nOrder for Items 7, 8, and 9 reflecting Respondent’s efforts to improve its practices and\nprocedures (Response). Respondent also requested a hearing and asked for the opportunity to\nmeet informally with PHMSA to discuss Items 5 and 6. Respondent and PHMSA (the Parties)\nsubsequently met to discuss the issues raised in the Response. As a result of those discussions\nPHMSA has agreed to withdraw the warning in Item 1, and Respondent has agreed to withdraw\nits hearing request and accept the findings of violation alleged in the Notice, subject to the\nclarifications as set forth in the Consent Agreement, pay a reduced civil penalty in the amount of\n$385,500 for Items 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, and to undertake certain corrective measures.\nAccordingly, the Consent Agreement is hereby approved and incorporated by reference into this\nOrder. Tallgrass is hereby ordered to comply with the terms of the Consent Agreement, effective\nimmediately.\nPursuant to 49 U.S.C. 60101, et seq., failure to comply with this Consent Order may result in the\nassessment of civil penalties as set forth in 49 C.F.R. § 190.223.\n\n\n\nThe terms and conditions of this Consent Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nMay 10, 2022\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n\n\n2U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nTallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC, )\n)\n) CPF No. 3-2021-046-NOPV\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nCONSENT AGREEMENT\nFrom August 2, 2020, to October 23, 2020, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), pursuant to Chapter\n601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), inspected Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC’s\n(Tallgrass or Respondent) records and facilities in Lakewood, Colorado.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated November 23, 2021, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty and\nProposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice\nalleged that Respondent committed probable violations of seven provisions of 49 C.F.R. part 195\n(Items 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9), proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct\nthe alleged violations, and proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $437,300 associated with\nthose items. Three other probable violations (Items 1, 2, and 10) were brought as warnings,\nadvising Respondent to correct them or be subject to potential future enforcement action.\nIn response to the Notice, Respondent contested the underlying allegations for Items 1, 5, and 6;\noffered additional information regarding the facts underlying Items 2 and 10; requested a\nreduction of the instances of violation for Item 3 along with a corresponding reduction to the\nproposed civil penalty, and modification of the proposed compliance order; requested conversion\nof Item 4 to a Notice of Amendment; and requested additional language be added to the Final\nOrder for Items 7, 8, and 9 reflecting Respondent’s efforts to improve its practices and\nprocedures (Response). Respondent also requested a hearing and asked for the opportunity to\nmeet informally with PHMSA to discuss Items 5 and 6.\nPHMSA and Respondent (the Parties) subsequently met to discuss the issues raised in the\nResponse. As a result of those discussions, as explained in more detail below, PHMSA has\nagreed to withdraw the warning in Item 1, and Respondent has agreed to withdraw its hearing\nrequest and accept the findings of violation alleged in the Notice, subject to the clarifications as\n\n\n\nset forth below, pay a reduced civil penalty in the amount of $385,500 for Items 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and\n9, and to undertake certain corrective measures.\nHaving agreed that settlement of this enforcement action will avoid further administrative\nproceedings or litigation and will serve the public interest by promoting safety and protection of\nthe environment, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. part 190, and upon consent and agreement of Respondent\nand PHMSA, the Parties hereby agree as follows:\nI. General Provisions:\n1. Respondent acknowledges that as the operator of the pipeline facilities subject to\nthe Notice, Respondent and its referenced hazardous liquid pipeline facilities are subject to the\njurisdiction of the Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations\nand administrative orders issued thereunder. For purposes of this Agreement, Respondent\nacknowledges that it received proper notice of PHMSA’s action in this proceeding and that the\nNotice states claims upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq.,\nand the regulations and orders issued thereunder.\n2. After Respondent returns this signed Agreement to PHMSA, the Agency’s\nrepresentative will present it to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, recommending\nthat the Associate Administrator adopt the terms of this Agreement by issuing an administrative\norder (Consent Order) incorporating the terms of this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement\nconstitute an offer of settlement until accepted by the Associate Administrator. Once accepted,\nthe Associate Administrator will issue a Consent Order incorporating the terms of this Agreement.\n3. Respondent consents to the issuance of the Consent Order, and hereby waives\nany further procedural requirements with respect to its issuance. Respondent waives all rights to\ncontest the adequacy of notice, or the validity of the Consent Order or this Agreement, including\nall rights to administrative or judicial hearings or appeals, except as set forth herein.\n4. This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon PHMSA and Respondent, its\nofficers, directors, and employees, and its successors, assigns, or other entities or persons otherwise\nbound by law. Respondent agrees to provide a copy of this Agreement and any incorporated work\nplans and schedules to all of Respondent’s officers, employees, and agents whose duties might\nreasonably include compliance with this Agreement.\n5. This Agreement constitutes the final, complete and exclusive agreement and\nunderstanding between the Parties with respect to the settlement embodied in this Agreement.\nThe Parties acknowledge that there are no representations, agreements or understandings\nrelating to settlement other than those expressly contained in this Agreement, except that the\nterms of this Agreement may be construed by reference to the Notice.\n6. Nothing in this Agreement affects or relieves Respondent of its responsibility to\ncomply with all applicable requirements of the Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101,\net seq., and the regulations and orders issued thereunder. Nothing in this Agreement alters\nPHMSA’s right of access, entry, inspection, and information gathering or PHMSA’s authority to\n\n\n\nbring enforcement actions against Respondent pursuant to the Federal pipeline safety laws, the\nregulations and orders issued thereunder, or any other provision of Federal or State law.\n7. For all transfers of ownership or operating responsibility of Respondent’s pipeline\nsystem referenced herein, Respondent will provide a copy of this Agreement to the prospective\ntransferee at least 30 days prior to such transfer. Respondent will provide written notice of the\ntransfer to the PHMSA Central Regional Director no later than 60 days after the transfer occurs.\n8. This Agreement does not waive or modify any Federal, State, or local laws or\nregulations that are applicable to Respondent’s pipeline systems. This Agreement is not a\npermit, or a modification of any permit, under any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations.\nRespondent remains responsible for achieving and maintaining compliance with all applicable\nFederal, State, and local laws, regulations and permits.\n9. This Agreement does not create rights in, or grant any cause of action to, any\nthird party not party to this ","truncated":true,"body_characters":59949}