{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420091012","title":"NATURAL GAS PIPELINE CO OF AMERICA (KMI) — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2009-05-08","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.13(c), 192.481(c), 192.705(a), 192.707(a)(2), 192.751(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420091012.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420091012.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420091012","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420091012","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving NATURAL GAS PIPELINE CO OF AMERICA (KMI). PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.13(c),  192.481(c),  192.705(a),  192.707(a)(2),  192.751(c). The case was opened on 2009-05-08 and is reported as closed as of 2009-12-18. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420091012_FinalOrder_10292009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420091012/420091012_FinalOrder_10292009.pdf\n\n420091012_FinalOrder_10292009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420091012/420091012_FinalOrder_10292009_text.pdf\n\n420091012_NOPVPCO_05082009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420091012/420091012_NOPVPCO_05082009.pdf\n\n420091012_NOPVPCO_05082009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420091012/420091012_NOPVPCO_05082009_text.pdf\n\n420091012_Operator Response_11192009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420091012/420091012_Operator%20Response_11192009.pdf\n\n420091012_Response to NOPVPCO_06032009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420091012/420091012_Response%20to%20NOPVPCO_06032009.pdf\n\n420091012_FinalOrder_10292009_text.pdf\n\nOCT 29 2009\nMr. Dwayne Burton\nVice-President – Operations\nNatural Gas Pipeline Company of America\nOne Allen Center\n500 Dallas Street\nSuite 1000\nHouston, TX 77002\nRe: CPF No. 4-2009-1012\nDear Mr. Burton:\nEnclosed is the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of violation\nand specifies actions that Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America needs to take to comply\nwith the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been\ncompleted, as determined by the Director, Southwest Region, this enforcement action will be\nclosed. Your receipt of this Final Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R.\n§ 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. R.M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7009 1410 0000 2464 5751]\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 )\nNatural Gas Pipeline Company of America, ) CPF No. 4-2009-1012\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n_______________________________________________ )\nFINAL ORDER\nDuring the months of March through August, and November 2008, pursuant to 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60117, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n(PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an inspection of Natural Gas Pipeline\nCompany of America, (NGPL’s or Respondent’s) natural gas pipeline facilities and records\nlocated in southern Oklahoma, Texas, and Louisiana. As a result of the inspection, the Director,\nSouthwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to NGPL, by letter dated May 8, 2009, a Notice of\nProbable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that NGPL had violated 49\nC.F.R. §§ 192.481, 192.705, and 192.707, and proposed ordering NGPL to take certain measures\nto correct the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed finding that Respondent had\ncommitted probable violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.13 and 192.751, and warned Respondent to\ntake appropriate corrective actions or be subject to future enforcement action.\nNGPL responded to the Notice by letters dated June 3, 2009, and July 8, 2009. Respondent did\nnot contest the allegations of violation and provided explanations and information concerning the\ncorrective actions it was taking and planned to take in the future for the remaining items.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) & (c), which state:\n§ 192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(b) During inspections the operator must give particular attention to pipe at soil-to-\nair interfaces, under thermal insulation, under disbonded coatings, at pipe supports, in\nsplash zones, at deck penetrations, and in spans over water.\n\n\n\n2\n(c) If atmospheric corrosion is found during an inspection, the operator\nmust provide protection against the corrosion as required by § 192.479.\nItem 2 in the Notice alleged that Respondent violated § 192.481(b) and (c) by failing to provide\nprotection against atmospheric corrosion in a timely manner. Specifically, the Notice alleged\nNGPL’s above ground meter station piping had signs of atmospheric corrosion at the pipe\nsupports where metal-to-metal contact is present at the following locations: the Sycamore\nMeter/Tap facility, Energex/TransOK Bryan County Meter/Tap facility, and Delhi/Panola Meter\nfacility. Additionally, at the Erath/Henry Hub pig trap piping, the filter/separator piping at\nCompressor Station 346, and the Slug Catcher Pressure Regulator facility at Compressor Station\n342, there were signs of atmospheric corrosion. The atmospheric corrosion at Compressor\nStation 342 had been noted on follow-up work orders by NGPL personnel in March 2006, April\n2007, and April 2008 as “Poor.” At the time of inspection, Respondent had not taken corrective\nactions as required by 49 C.F.R. § 192.481 to correct these identified deficiencies.\nRespondent did not contest the allegation of violation, and indicated it would provide a plan of\naction to isolate metal-to-metal contact where required and to paint those facilities where\nrequired. In a letter dated July 8, 2009, Respondent provided a plan of action for completing\nremedial action. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.481(b) and (c) by\nfailing to take corrective actions to remedy identified deficiencies in corrosion control.\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.705(a), which states:\n§ 192.705 Transmission lines: Patrolling.\n(a) Each operator shall have a patrol program to observe surface conditions on\nand adjacent to the transmission line right-of-way for indications of leaks, construction\nactivity, and other factors affecting safety and operation.\nItem 3 in the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.705(a) by failing to ensure\nthat surface conditions were viewable along the entire right-of-way (ROW) during aerial\npatrolling. Specifically, the Notice alleged that numerous ROW areas were obstructed when\nviewed by aerial patrol due to vegetation overgrowth, trash, or a tree, including: the US 287/RR\ncrossing of the OE line; the 20 inch line north of the North Lansing Storage Field; the GC #1\ncrossing of the Sabine River; the GC #3 north of the Angelina River crossing; the GC #1 and #2\nsouth of TX SR 103 crossing; and the GC #1, #2, and #3 on the south side of the Trinity River.\nRespondent did not contest the allegation of violation, and indicated it would provide a plan of\naction to clear ROWs of debris and obstruction to enable aerial patrolling to continue. If\nimpossible to clear the ROW for aerial patrol, Respondent indicated it would clear the ROW for\nfoot patrol. In a letter dated July 8, 2009, Respondent provided a plan of action for Item 3, which\nindicated that Respondent is in the process of instituting remedial action. Accordingly, I find that\nRespondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.705(a) by failing to ensure clear and unobstructed ROWs\nwhen using aerial patrolling.\n\n\n\n3\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.707(a)(2), which states:\n§ 192.707 Line markers for mains and transmission lines.\n(a) Buried pipelines. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, a line\nmarker must be placed and maintained as close as practical over each buried main and\ntransmission line . . .\n(2) Wherever necessary to identify the location of the transmission line or main to\nreduce the possibility of damage or interference.\nItem 4 in the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.707(a)(2) by failing to\nprovide pipeline markers in several locations. Specifically, pipeline markers were missing along\nthe ROW in the vicinity of MP 461 for GC #1 and #2; north along the ROW for GC #1, #2 and\n#3 near MP 473; south from TX SR 154 along the ROW for the GC pipelines near MP 450; west\nalong the 30 inch Longview Lateral from MP 450; north along the GC #3 line-from the Angelina\nRiver near MP 369; south from TX SR 103 near MP 363 along GC #1 and #2; south from TX\nFM 1818 near MP 353 along GC #1 and #2; north from the MC & SA RR near MP 332 along\nGC #1 and #2; south beyond the fence line near MP 332 along GC #1 and #2; west along the\nHagist Lateral from MP 14 at TX CR 351; east along the Hagist Lateral from MP 15 at TX CR\n351 beyond the fence line; and south from the Aransas River near MP 77 along the GC #1 and\n#2.\nRespondent did not contest the allegation of violation, and indicated it would survey the noted\ncrossings and provide a plan of action to improve the signage as needed to denote the location of\nNGPL pipelines. In a letter dated July 8, 2009, Respondent provided a plan of action for\ncompleting remedial action to address the missing pipeline markers in the areas identified during\nthe inspection. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.707(a)(2) by failing\nto provide pipeline markers in several locations.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a Compliance Order with respect to Items 2, 3, and 4 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.481, 192.705, and 192.707. In a letter dated July 8, 2009,\nRespondent stated that it has completed certain portions of the items in the proposed compliance\norder; however, the operator has not submitted documentation supporting its claim that the\nactions have been completed.\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of gas or who owns\nor operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards\nestablished under chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R.\n§ 190.217, Respondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the\npipeline safety regulations applicable to its operations, and submit documentation demonstrating\neach Item has been completed. Respondent must:\n\n\n\n4\n1. In regard to Item Number 2, inspect all above ground facility piping for indications of\natmospheric corrosion. If atmospheric corrosion is found, provide protection against\ncorrosion, in accordance with 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.479 and 192.481, to ensure the safety of\nthe public and surrounding environment.\n2. In regard to Item Number 3, survey the ROWs and make necessary improvements to\nensure that the entire ROW can be observed using the chosen method of patrolling, in\naccordance with 49 C.F.R. § 192.705(a).\n3. In regard to Item Number 4, survey the pipeline ROWs and place additional markers to\nensure that pipeline markers are not only present at fence lines, roadway and railroad\ncrossings, but also wherever necessary to identify the pipeline location within the ROWs\nand to help prevent pipeline damage.\n4. Maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling the\nCompliance order and submit the total to Director. Costs shall be reported in two\ncategories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies\nand analyses; and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions and other changes\nto pipeline infrastructure.\n5. Complete these items and submit documentation of compliance within 120 days after the\nreceipt of the Final Order. Documentation shall be submitted to the Director, Southwest\nRegion, Office of Pipeline Safety, 8701 South Gessner Dr, Suite 1110, Houston, TX\n77074-2949.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent demonstrating good cause for an extension.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in administrative assessment of civil penalties not\nto exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues, or in referral to the\nAttorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 1 and 5, the Notice alleged probable violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.13(c)\nand 192.751(c) but did not propose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items.\nTherefore, these are considered to be warning items. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.13(c) (Notice Item 1) - Respondent’s alleged failure to follow its welder\nqualification procedures. Respondent’s procedures, O&M 401/C1061, Welder\nQualification and Testing, § 3.2 Company Welder Tests, states, “A Company welder will\ncomplete the annual test and any subsequent retests no later than April 1. A Company\nwelder must pass Tests 1 and 2 to be qualified.” The Notice alleged that one of\nRespondent’s company welders had taken the annual Welder Qualifications Tests 1 and 2\non April 10, rather than April 1. Respondent presented information in its Response\n\n\n\n5\nexplaining that the welder in question missed the April 1 test date due to a medical\ncondition which precluded him from performing any welding activities.\n49 C.F.R. § 192.751(c) (Notice Item 5) - Respondent’s alleged failure to have visible or\nreadable ‘No Smoking’ signs at Respondent’s MP 412 location and MP 4 location on the\nLA #1 line at the Trunkline Meter/Tap facility. By the next day of the inspection,\nRespondent replaced and/or added signs that had deteriorated at the locations specified\nduring the inspection\nRespondent presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to\naddress the cited items. Having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49 C.F.R.\n§ 190.205, that probable violations of 49 C.F.R. § 192.13(c) (Notice Item 1) and 49\nC.F.R. § 192.751(c) (Notice Item 5) have occurred and Respondent is hereby advised that in the\nevent OPS finds a violation for any of these items in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may\nbe subject to future enforcement action.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of\nthis Final Order. The petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent’s receipt of this\nFinal Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The terms of the order, including\nany required corrective action, shall remain in full force and effect unless the Associate\nAdministrator, upon request, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order shall be\neffective upon receipt.\n_____________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":14926}