{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32024044NOPV","title":"CENTRA PIPELINE MINNESOTA INC. — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2024-04-18","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 191.17(a)(1), 192.605(b)(1), 192.616(c), 192.624(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32024044nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32024044nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32024044nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32024044NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving CENTRA PIPELINE MINNESOTA INC.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 191.17(a)(1),  192.605(b)(1),  192.616(c),  192.624(b). The case was opened on 2024-04-18 and is reported as closed as of 2026-01-08. Proposed civil penalty: $20,400. Assessed civil penalty: $0. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32024044NOPV_Closure Letter_01082026_(23-265891).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_Closure%20Letter_01082026_(23-265891).pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_Closure Letter_01082026_(23-265891)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_Closure%20Letter_01082026_(23-265891)_text.pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_Final Order_08072025_(23-265891).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_Final%20Order_08072025_(23-265891).pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_Final Order_08072025_(23-265891)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_Final%20Order_08072025_(23-265891)_text.pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_05152024_(23-265891).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_05152024_(23-265891).pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_PCP PCO_04182024_(23-265891).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_PCP%20PCO_04182024_(23-265891).pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_PCP PCO_04182024_(23-265891)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024044NOPV/32024044NOPV_PCP%20PCO_04182024_(23-265891)_text.pdf\n\n32024044NOPV_Closure Letter_01082026_(23-265891)_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\n901 Locust Street, Suite 480\nKansas City, MO 64106\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: tkarry@efgroupllc.com; ppowers@efgroupllc.com;\njbrophy@efgroupllc.com\nJanuary 8, 2026\nMr. Todd Karry\nPresident & CEO\nCentra Pipeline Minnesota Inc.\n33717 Woodward Ave. #600\nBirmingham, MI 48009\nRE: CPF 3-2024-044-NOPV\nDear Mr. Karry:\nOn August 7, 2025, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued\na Final Order, pursuant to 49 CFR § 190.213, in the above-referenced case. This Order included a\nCompliance Order. Based on our review of the documentation provided, it has been determined\nthat Centra Pipeline Minnesota Inc has complied with the terms of the 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,\nDavid Barrett\nActing Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Phillip Powers, Director Pipeline Operations, Centra, ppowers@efgroupllc.com\nJoe Brophy, VP & COO, Centra, jborphy@efgroupllc.com\n\n32024044NOPV_Final Order_08072025_(23-265891)_text.pdf\n\nAugust 7, 2025\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: tkarry@efgroupllc.com\nMr. Todd Karry\nPresident\nCentra Pipeline Minnesota Inc.\n33717 Woodward Avenue, #600\nBirmingham, MI 48009\nRe: CPF No. 3-2024-044-NOPV\nDear Mr. Karry:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation, withdraws the proposed civil penalty, and specifies actions that need to be taken by\nCentra Pipeline Minnesota, Inc. to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of\nthe compliance order are completed, as determined by the Director, Central Region, this\nenforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by e-mail is effective upon the date of\ntransmission and acknowledgement of receipt as provided under 49 CFR § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nLinda Daugherty\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure (Final Order)\ncc: Mr. David Barrett, Acting Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMr. Phillip Powers, Director Pipeline Operations, Centra Pipeline Minnesota Inc.,\nppowers@efgroupllc.com\nMr. Joe Brophy, Vice President and General Manager, Centra Pipeline Minnesota Inc.,\njborphy@efgroupllc.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 )\nCentra Pipeline Minnesota, Inc., ) CPF No. 3-2024-044-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom August 28 to August 31, 2023, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline\nand Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),\nconducted an inspection of Centra Pipeline Minnesota, Inc.’s (CPM or Respondent) records and\npipeline facilities in northern Minnesota. CPM operates a natural gas transmission pipeline facility in\nnorthern Minnesota.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent, by\nletter dated April 18, 2024, a Notice of Probable Violation (Notice). In accordance with 49 CFR §\n190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent committed violations of 49 CFR Part 192,\nproposed assessing a civil penalty of $20,400, and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain\nmeasures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also included a warning item pursuant to 49\nCFR § 190.205, which warned CPM to correct the probable violation or face possible future\nenforcement action.\nCPM responded to the Notice by letter dated, May 15, 2024 (Response). Respondent did not\ncontest the alleged violations, but requested relief from the proposed civil penalty.\nRespondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR Part 192, as follows:\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 192.605(b)(1), which states:\n§ 192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by\nparagraph (a) of this section must include procedures for the following, if\napplicable, to provide safety during maintenance and operations.\n\n\n\n(1) Operating, maintaining, and repairing the pipeline in accordance\nwith each of the requirements of this subpart and subpart M of this part.\nThe Notice alleged that CPM failed to have procedures addressing the requirements of subpart M of\nPart 192. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent failed to have procedures for\nassessments to address certain Class 3 locations on its transmission pipeline that were not part of\nhigh consequence areas (HCAs), as required by section 192.710(a)(1).\nRespondent did not contest Item 2. CPM stated it had substantially completed the necessary\nadditions to its procedures to comply with the proposed compliance order for Item 2, and that it\nintended to submit those procedures to PHMSA within 60 days of the date of its Response.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated section\n192.605(b)(1) by failing to have procedures addressing the requirements of subpart M of Part 192.\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 192.616(c), which states:\n§ 192.616 Public awareness.\n(a) . . . .\n(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations,\nincluding baseline and supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless\nthe operator provides justification in its program or procedural manual as to\nwhy compliance with all or certain provisions of the recommended practice\nis not practicable and not necessary for safety.\nThe Notice alleged that CPM failed to follow the general program recommendations of API RP\n1162 as required by section 192.616(c). Specifically, the Notice alleged that CPM failed to have\nrecords demonstrating compliance with section 8.4 of API RP 1162 for measuring program\neffectiveness.\nRespondent did not contest Item 3. CPM stated it intended to file its amended procedure and the\nresults of its effectiveness study for review by PHMSA within 90 days of the date of its Response.\nAs discussed further below, CPM also requested relief from the proposed civil penalty for Item 3.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated section\n192.616(c) by failing to follow the general program recommendations of API RP 1162.\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 192.624(b), which states:\n§ 192.624 Maximum allowable operating pressure reconfirmation: Onshore steel\ntransmission pipelines.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) Procedures and completion dates. Operators of a pipeline subject to\nthis section must develop and document procedures for completing all\nactions required by this section by July 1, 2021. These procedures must\ninclude a process for reconfirming MAOP for any pipelines that meet a\ncondition of § 192.624(a), and for performing a spike test or material\nverification in accordance with §§ 192.506 and 192.607, if applicable. All\n\n\n\nactions required by this section must be completed according to the\nfollowing schedule:\nThe Notice alleged that CPM failed to adopt procedures to address section 192.624(b). Specifically,\nthe Notice alleged that CPM failed to adopt maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP)\nreconfirmation procedures for its pipeline segments in HCAs and Class 3 locations in the\nInternational Falls, Minnesota area, and near the Baudette, Minnesota airport.\nRespondent did not contest Item 4. CPM stated it had substantially completed the necessary\nadditions to its procedures to comply with the proposed compliance order for Item 4, and that it\nintended to submit those procedures to PHMSA within 60 days of the date of the Response.\nAccordingly, after considering all the evidence, I find that Respondent violated section 192.624(b)\nby failing adopt procedures to address MAOP reconfirmation.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations.1\nIn determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.225, I\nmust consider the following criteria: the nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,\nincluding adverse impact on the environment; the degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history\nof Respondent’s prior offenses; any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue\ndoing business; the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations; and self-disclosure or actions to correct a violation prior to discovery by PHMSA.\nIn addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction\nbecause of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $20,400 for the violation cited above. Effective May\n20, 2025, PHMSA revised its proposed civil penalty calculation policy to use the version of the\nCivil Penalty Worksheet in effect when the alleged violation occurred. The new policy did not\nchange the proposed civil penalty in this case.\nItem 3: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $20,400 for Respondent’s violation of section\n192.616(c), for failing to maintain records demonstrating compliance with section 8.4 of API RP\n1162 for measuring public awareness program effectiveness. The new policy for calculating a\nproposed civil penalty did not change the proposed civil penalty for this item. In its Response,\nCPM requested relief from the civil penalty. Respondent’s request was primarily based on its\nassertion that it is considered a small business under Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations\nand that the proposed civil penalty represents a financial burden. CPM stated that in 2023 it had\n1 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts.\n\n\n\nregulated assets of less than $1 million, a total revenue of $1.1 million, and a net income of less\nthan $35,000. CPM provided the Director an auditor’s report, financial statements, and a FERC\nfinancial report corroborating those statements.\nCPM also discussed its efforts to comply with the applicable public awareness program\nrequirements since the Notice was issued and asserted the proposed civil penalty will not improve\nthe effectiveness of that program. CPM also explained that its pipeline system is small in scale\n(0.698 HCA miles and 179 landowner easements on the pipeline right-of-way), asserting a smaller\nrisk profile as compared to larger operators in relation to the impact of public awareness programs.\nCPM stated that it views personal interactions with landowners as one of its most effective\nawareness activities, and also that the proposed penalty may impact resources that may otherwise be\ndirected toward regulatory compliance. CPM also pointed to a recent hiring of personnel to address\nthe effectiveness of its programs at a cost that exceeds that of the proposed civil penalty. In sum,\nCPM requested that the proposed civil penalty be withdrawn, and that the non-compliance\nidentified in Item 3 be addressed only through the proposed compliance actions.\nPursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60122(b)(1)(B) and 49 CFR § 190.225(a)(5) in determining the amount of\ncivil penalty I must consider “the effect on [R]espondent’s ability to continue in business.” Based\non the financial information provided by Respondent, I find assessment of a civil penalty would\nhave an adverse effect on Respondent’s ability to continue in business. Accordingly, having\nreviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I do not assess a civil penalty for the\nviolation.\nCOMPLIANCE ACTIONS\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 2, 3, and 4 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 CFR §§ 192.605(b)(1), 192.616(c), and 192.624(b), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of natural gas or who owns or\noperates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established\nunder chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 CFR § 190.217,\nRespondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety\nregulations applicable to its operations:\n1. With respect to the violation of section 192.605(b)(1) (Item 2), Respondent must create\nand incorporate the procedures addressing assessments of Class 3 locations as required by\nsection 192.710(a)(1) into its Operation and Maintenance manuals and provide those\nprocedures to the Director within 90 days of the date of receipt of this Final Order.\n2. With respect to the violation of section 192.616(c) (Item 3), Respondent must revise\nprocedure DPPA-PRO-001 to include the four measures for effectiveness in accordance with\nsection 8.4 of API RP 1162, as well as include the four-year time requirement to conduct the\nrequired study. CPM must also conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Public\nAwareness Program. Both the revised procedures and the completed effectiveness\nevaluation must be provided to the Director within 90 days of receipt of this Final Order.\n3. With respect to the violation of section 192.624(b) (Item 4), Respondent must create and\nincorporate the required MAOP reconfirmation procedures into its Operation and\n\n\n\nMaintenance manuals within 90 days of receipt of this Final Order. Additionally, within 120\ndays of receipt of this final Order, CPM must provide the Director with:\ni. A list of all line segments applicable to section 192.624;\nii. Any hydrostatic records that would apply under section 192.624(a)(1);\niii. A schedule of when MAOP reconfirmation of the line segment(s) will occur; and,\niv. The method CPM plans to utilize to reconfirm MAOP.\nThe Director may grant an additional extension of time to comply with any of the required items\nupon a written request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an\nextension. Upon completion of the ordered actions, Respondent may request that the Director close\nthe case.\nPHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director. It is\nrequested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties not\nto exceed $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (see 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts), for\neach violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for\nappropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nWARNING ITEM\nWith respect to Item 1, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 191, but identified it as a\nwarning item pursuant to section 190.205. The warning was for:\n49 CFR § 191.17(a)(1) (Item 1) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to file a complete\nannual report for calendar year 2022.\nIf OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to\nfuture enforcement action.\nUnder 49 CFR § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final\nOrder to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey\nAvenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of\nChief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. The written petition must be received no later than\n20 days after receipt of the Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a\nstatement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 CFR § 190.243. The filing of a\npetition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of the\norder, including corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon\nrequest, grants a stay.\nThe terms and conditions of this order are effective upon service in accordance with 49 CFR\n§ 190.5.\n\n\n\n___________________________________ _________________________\nLinda Daugherty Date Issued\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":18629}