# PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPELINE CO — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 420081011
- **title:** PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPELINE CO — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2008-06-20
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.905(a), 192.921(a)(4).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420081011.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420081011.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420081011
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420081011
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPELINE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.905(a),  192.921(a)(4). The case was opened on 2008-06-20 and is reported as closed as of 2010-10-06. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

420081011_Closure Letter_10062010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_Closure%20Letter_10062010.pdf

420081011_Closure Letter_10062010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_Closure%20Letter_10062010_text.pdf

420081011_FinalOrder_07262010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_FinalOrder_07262010.pdf

420081011_FinalOrder_07262010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_FinalOrder_07262010_text.pdf

420081011_nopvpco_06202008.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_nopvpco_06202008.pdf

420081011_nopvpco_06202008_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_nopvpco_06202008_text.pdf

420081011_Operator Response_07222008.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420081011/420081011_Operator%20Response_07222008.pdf

420081011_FinalOrder_07262010_text.pdf

JUL 26 2010
Mr. Jeryl Mohn
Senior Vice President, Operations and Engineering
Panhandle Energy, a division of Southern Union Company
5444 Westheimer Road
Houston, TX 77056-5306
Mr. Don Hawkins
Senior Vice President, Operations and Engineering
Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC
711 Louisiana Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
Re: CPF No. 4-2008-1011
Dear Mr. Mohn and Mr. Hawkins:
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 Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC to
comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been
completed, as determined by the Director, Southwest Region, this enforcement action will be
closed as to Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC. The Final Order also makes findings of
violation and finds that Panhandle Energy has completed the actions specified in the Notice to
comply with the pipeline safety regulations. Therefore, this case is now closed as to Panhandle
Energy. 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. R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, PHMSA
Mr. Jerry F. Rau, Director of Pipeline Integrity, Panhandle Energy, 5444 Westheimer
Road, Houston, TX 77056-5306
CERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7009 1410 0000 2472 2643]



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
In the Matter of )
Panhandle Energy, a division of ) CPF No. 4-2008-1011
Southern Union Company, )
and )
Transwestern Pipeline )
Company, LLC, )
)
)
)
)
)
Respondents. )
____________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
On November 13-17 and November 27-30, 2006, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives
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
Panhandle Energy (Panhandle) in Houston, Texas. The PHMSA team inspected the integrity
management program for Panhandle’s entire pipeline system. At the time, Panhandle operated
the following gas pipeline systems consisting of over 15,000 miles of transmission lines:
Panhandle Eastern Pipeline; Florida Gas Transmission; Trunkline Gas; and Transwestern
Pipeline.
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Panhandle, by letter dated June 20, 2008, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed
finding that Panhandle had violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.905(a) and proposed ordering Panhandle to
take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed finding that
Panhandle had committed another probable violation of 49 C.F.R. Part 192 and warned
Panhandle to take appropriate corrective action or be subject to future enforcement action.
The probable violations identified in the Notice concern segments of the Florida Gas
Transmission and Transwestern Pipeline systems in Louisiana and Arizona, respectively. The
Notice alleged that Panhandle could not demonstrate the accuracy of its information regarding
the centerlines of the pipeline segments, high consequence area (HCA) boundaries, and the
relative locations of pipeline segments and adjacent structures.



2
Panhandle responded to the Notice by letter dated July 22, 2008. Panhandle explained that it no
longer owned or operated the Transwestern Pipeline system. Panhandle stated that the system is
now owned and operated by the Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC (Transwestern), a
subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. Panhandle therefore only addressed the allegations
relating to the Florida Gas Transmission pipeline system. Panhandle contested some of the
allegations and offered additional information in response to the Notice. The company did not
contest certain other allegations of violation and provided information concerning the corrective
actions it had taken. Panhandle did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to
one.
Panhandle forwarded the Notice to Transwestern, and Transwestern responded to the Notice by
letter to PHMSA dated July 14, 2008. Transwestern confirmed that the ownership of the
Transwestern Pipeline system was in the process of changing at the time of the PHMSA
inspection, and that at that time Transwestern was responsible for ensuring the safety of the
system. Transwestern limited its response to the allegations relating to that system and did not
contest the allegations. The company provided information concerning the corrective actions it
planned to take and requested 120 days to carry out the steps described in the Proposed
Compliance Order. Transwestern did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to
one.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged violations by Panhandle with respect to both the Florida Gas and
Transwestern Pipeline systems. Panhandle, however, did not have responsibility for ensuring the
safety of the Transwestern Pipeline system at the time of the inspection and no longer owns that
system. Transwestern, the new owner, received the Notice and acknowledged in its Response
that it now owns the system and was responsible for ensuring the system’s safety at the time of
the inspection. Finally, Transwestern did not contest the allegations as to that system.
Therefore, for the purposes of this Final Order, both Panhandle and Transwestern are considered
Respondents to this enforcement action.
The Notice alleged that Panhandle and Transwestern violated 49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Panhandle and Transwestern violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.905(a),
which states:
§ 192.905 How does an operator identify a high consequence area?
(a) General. To determine which segments of an operator’s
transmission pipeline system are covered by this subpart, an operator must
identify the high consequence areas. An operator must use method (1) or
(2) from the definition in § 192.903 to identify a high consequence area.
An operator may apply one method to its entire pipeline system, or an
operator may apply one method to individual portions of the pipeline
system. An operator must describe in its integrity management program
which method it is applying to each portion of the operator's pipeline
system. The description must include the potential impact radius when
utilized to establish a high consequence area. (See appendix E.I. for
guidance on identifying high consequence areas.)



3
The Notice alleged that Panhandle violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.905(a) by incorrectly identifying the
locations of pipeline centerlines and, as a result, HCA boundaries. Specifically, as to the Florida
Gas system in Louisiana, the Notice alleged that Panhandle incorrectly identified the centerlines
of lines LAMEB-9 (30”) and LAMEA-9 (24”) in Washington Parish and that HCAs were
therefore not identified. The Notice also alleged that the HCA boundaries were incorrect for the
LAMEA-8 (20”) and LAMEB-8 (30”)1 in St. Helena Parish.
In its Response, Panhandle did not contest that the centerlines of the pipeline segments in
Washington Parish were incorrect, but indicated that the information has been corrected. In
response to the allegation that no HCAs were identified with respect to these segments,
Panhandle stated that the HCAs were actually identified in “screenshot” images from 2006 and
2008, although the 2006 image did not show the HCA correctly. Panhandle contested the
allegation that the HCA boundaries in Helena Parish were incorrect, but did not submit
documentation to rebut the allegation that the company could not demonstrate the accuracy of
HCA boundaries at the time of the inspection in accordance with § 192.905(a). Panhandle
explained in its Response that after re-evaluating the information, the HCA boundaries are now
correct and that the HCA boundary extensions were due to structures being added within the
potential impact radius (PIR).
After considering all of the evidence, I find that Panhandle violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.905(a) by
failing to document the accurate identification of HCAs with respect to certain pipeline
segments, but that the company has taken corrective measures to substantiate the correct location
of HCAs to ensure future compliance.
This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action
taken against Panhandle.
As to the Transwestern Pipeline system, the Notice alleged that Transwestern incorrectly
identified the relative location of adjacent buildings and the centerlines of pipeline segments 060
MM221 (30”) and 060 MM121 (30”) in Coconino County, Arizona. The Notice also alleged
that Transwestern incorrectly identified the locations of buildings adjacent to pipeline segment
060 MM11N (30”) in Mohave County, Arizona. Transwestern did not contest this allegation of
violation.
Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Transwestern violated 49
C.F.R. § 192.905(a) by incorrectly identifying the relative locations of pipeline centerlines and
adjacent buildings.
This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action
taken against Transwestern.
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item 1 in the Notice for violations of 49
C.F.R. § 192.905(a). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the
transportation of gas or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the
COMPLIANCE ORDER
1 The Notice refers to the “LAMEA-8 (30”),” but Panhandle refers to this line as the “LAMEB-8 (30”)”. This Final
Order uses Panhandle’s name for this line.



4
applicable safety standards established under chapter 601. The Director has indicated that
Panhandle has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance order:
With respect to the violation of § 192.905(a) (Item 1), Panhandle has taken all the actions
specified in the compliance order as to the Florida Gas system. In its response to the Notice,
Panhandle provided documentation that the problems identified in connection with the Florida
Gas system have been investigated and that erroneous data had been corrected. Panhandle
corrected the information on the locations of the Florida Gas segments and verified these
locations using orthorectified photography. Panhandle’s response included “screenshot” images
and aerial photographs indicating the beginning and end points of the HCAs associated with the
segments.
Accordingly, I find that Panhandle has achieved compliance with respect to these violations.
Therefore, the compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order as to
Panhandle.
With respect to the proposed compliance terms applicable to the Transwestern system, the
company requested “120 days from receipt” of its Response, dated July 14, 2008, to address the
terms. By virtue of the issuance date of this Final Order, Transwestern has been provided the
requested time, and therefore I do not provide the company with any additional time to come into
compliance beyond the originally proposed 30 days from its receipt of the Final Order. Pursuant
to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Transwestern 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 § 192.905(a) (Item 1), Transwestern must investigate
and provide documentation that substantiates that line segments 060 MM221 (30”),
060 MM121 (30”), and 060 MM11N (30”) have been investigated and that any
erroneous data found has been corrected. The documentation must include
“screenshot” images and aerial photography that clearly indicate the beginning and
end point of the HCA associated with each particular line segment. Additionally,
documentation must show what effects any new HCAs or extensions of HCAs may
have had on the baseline assessment plan and how those effects will be remediated.
Transwestern must submit, within 30 days of receipt of this Final Order, the results of
this investigation to the Director, Southwest Region, Office of Pipeline Safety,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 8701 South Gessner, Suite
1110, Houston, Texas 77074.
2. Transwestern shall maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs
associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director,
Southwest Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. Costs
shall be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision
of plans, procedures, studies, and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with
replacements, additions, and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.
The Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a
written request timely submitted by Transwestern and demonstrating good cause for an
extension.



5
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
against Transwestern 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.
WARNING ITEM
With respect to Item 2, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 192 but did not propose a
civil penalty or compliance order for this item. Therefore, this is considered to be a warning
item. The warning was for:
49 C.F.R. § 192.921(a) (Item 2) ─ Panhandle’s alleged failure to notify the
Office of Pipeline Safety 180 days before assessing the integrity of a pipeline
using “other technology,” i.e., a method not described in § 192.921(a)(1)-(3). To
assess 30 feet of pipe in Dade County, Florida, Panhandle used long range
ultrasonic testing (LRUT), which qualifies as “[o]ther technology” as provided in
§ 192.921(a)(4).
Panhandle presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to
address the cited item. Accordingly, having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49
C.F.R. § 190.205, that probable violations of 49 C.F.R. § 192.921(a) (Notice Item 2) have
occurred and Panhandle is hereby advised to ensure such conditions have been corrected. In the
event that OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Panhandle may be
subject to future enforcement action.
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondents have a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of
this Final Order. The petition must be sent to: 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. PHMSA
will accept petitions received no later than 20 days after receipt of this Final Order by
Respondents, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other
requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.215. Unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a
stay, 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

420081011_Closure Letter_10062010_text.pdf

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
October 6, 2010
Mr. Don Hawkins
Senior Vice President, Operations and Engineering
Transwestern Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
711 Louisiana Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
CPF 4-2008-1011
Dear Mr. Hawkins:
On July 26, 2010, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued
to Transwestern Pipeline Company, L.L.C. a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This
Order makes findings of violations and specified actions that needed to be taken by
Transwestern Pipeline Company, L.L.C. in a Compliance Order. Based on our review of the
documentation you provided, it has been determined that you have complied with the terms of
this Order.
Accordingly, this case is now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to the
matters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
R. M. Seeley
Director, Southwest Region
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 18063