# WESTERN GAS INTERSTATE CO — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 420101001
- **title:** WESTERN GAS INTERSTATE CO — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2010-01-13
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.463(a), 192.465(d).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420101001.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420101001.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420101001
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420101001
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving WESTERN GAS INTERSTATE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.463(a),  192.465(d). The case was opened on 2010-01-13 and is reported as closed as of 2011-12-22. Proposed civil penalty: $120,000. Assessed civil penalty: $0. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

420101001_Final Order_12222011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420101001/420101001_Final%20Order_12222011.pdf

420101001_Final Order_12222011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420101001/420101001_Final%20Order_12222011_text.pdf

420101001_NOPV PCP PCO_01132010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420101001/420101001_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_01132010.pdf

420101001_NOPV PCP PCO_01132010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420101001/420101001_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_01132010_text.pdf

420101001_NOPV PCP PCO_01132010_text.pdf

NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION
PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY
and
PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
January 13, 2010
Richard Hatchett
Western Gas Interstate
211 North Colorado
Midland, Texas 79701
CPF 4-2010-1001
Dear Mr. Hatchett:
On April 14-17, 2009, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code inspected your
Western Gas Interstate (WGI) in Guymon, Oklahoma.
As a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the
Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the
probable violation(s) are:
1. §192.463 External corrosion control: Cathodic protection
(a) Each cathodic protection system required by this subpart must provide a level of
cathodic protection that complies with one or more of the applicable criteria
contained in appendix D of this part.
WGI procedure P-192.455 titled “Installation of Cathodic Protection System” identifies the
various criteria from appendix D allowed to determine adequate cathodic protection. However,
WGI procedure P-192.465(a) titled “Conduct Cathodic Protection Surveys” which references
192.463, only describes and allows one acceptable method for determining cathodic protection in



the section titled “Measure Pipeline-to-Soil Potentials, DC” and that method is the negative
voltage of at least 850 millivolts. WGI could not demonstrate compliance with this code
requirement as demonstrated in the following table. Further, WGI could not demonstrate
compliance with any of the other acceptable criteria found in appendix D.
Western Gas Interstate
Table 1
Test Station
Location 2009 2008 2007
Note: All readings negative unless otherwise stated
Three (3) locations with readings 2+ years out of compliance
Buckles #2 Reg Sta 0.546 mv 0.519 mv 0.756 mv
.25 S Buckles Ranch
Entrance 0.609 mv 0.627 mv 0.787 mv
1M N of rectifier #1 @
W House 0.775 mv 0.644 mv 0.708 mv
Nineteen (19) locations with readings 1+ years out of compliance
1 mi. E. of bacon Tie-In 0.799 mv 0.683 mv
1 mi. E. of Rect. #9 0.818 mv 0.714 mv
1 mi. from Last Test
Station 0.533 mv 0.746 mv
Same location as last
test station 0.461 mv 0.670 mv
Clifford Evans Corner 0.763 mv 0.592 mv
1 mi. from last test
station 0.708 mv 0.622 mv
1 mi. from last test
station 0.832 mv 0.735 mv
1 mi. from Rect. 17 0.765 mv 0.752 mv
.5M S Rectifier #6 0.698 mv 0.721 mv
Schertler Reg Sta. 0.655 mv 0.700 mv
S Smith Sta. 0.664 mv 0.692 mv
1.3 M North of T/S # 51 0.743 mv 0.729 mv
1 Mile North 0.750 mv 0.738 mv
½ Mile North 0.776 mv 0.752 mv
Steffins 0.717 mv 0.686 mv
1 Mile North 0.694 mv 0.641 mv
1 Mile North 0.369 mv 0.641 mv
Union Lat W Side 287 0.845 mv 0.593 mv
Sandyview Reg. Sta 0.717 mv 0.674 mv
2



2. §192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring
(d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any deficiencies
indicated by the monitoring.
WGI requires in its “Gas Operations and Maintenance Manual” in section 3.3 Compliance
Requirements, that prompt remedial actions per 192.465(d) are implemented per WGI’s 3.37
Table 7: Necessary Compliance Records. However, WGI has no procedures or forms for
implementing 192.465(d). The operator should have made all necessary evaluations and
decisions based on their cathodic protection readings and completed the necessary actions prior
to the next annual cathodic protection survey. As indicated in item 1. above, pipelines showing
inadequate test readings for one or more consecutive years indicate inadequate levels of cathodic
protection. WGI had not corrected three locations in more than two years and nineteen locations
in more than one year, which does not represent a reasonable time for Prompt Remedial Actions.
Proposed Civil Penalty
Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000
for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any
related series of violations. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the circumstances and
supporting documentation involved in the above probable violation(s) and has recommended that
you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $120,000 as follows:
Item number PENALTY
1 $60,000
2 $60,000
Proposed Compliance Order
With respect to items 1 & 2, pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Western
Gas Interstate. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a
part of this Notice.
Response to this Notice
Enclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators
in Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be
advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being
made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for
confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you
must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for
confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information
qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days
of receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this
3



Notice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in
this Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order.
In your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2010-1001 and for each document
you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.
Sincerely,
R. M. Seeley
Director, Southwest Region
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
Enclosures: Proposed Compliance Order
Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings
4



PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
Pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Western Gas Interstate a Compliance Order
incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of Western Gas
International with the pipeline safety regulations:
1. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to monitoring the adequacy
of cathodic protection, Western Gas Interstate must create new procedures and
forms for implementing 192.465(d).
2. Western Gas Interstate must implement corrective measures necessary to
remediate the low potentials identified in the inspection and provide documented
proof of the corrective measures.
3. In regard to Item Number 1 of the Notice pertaining to the criteria for determining
the adequacy of cathodic protection, Western Gas Interstate must submit
documentation that shows the required cathodic protection criteria has been met
along the continuous length of the pipelines as required by §192.463 and the
Western Gas Interstate Operations, Maintenance, and Emergencies Manual. This
documentation should include those pipeline segments specifically noted in the
spread sheet shown above.
4. Western Gas Interstate shall maintain documentation of the safety improvement
costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to
R. M. Seeley, 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.
5

420101001_Final Order_12222011_text.pdf

DEC 22 2011
Mr. J. L. Davis
President
Western Gas Interstate Company
211 N. Colorado
Midland, TX 79701
Re: CPF No. 4-2010-1001
Dear Mr. Davis:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It withdraws the
allegations of violation, the proposed compliance order and the proposed civil penalty. This
enforcement action is now closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed
effective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. R. M. Seeley, Director, OPS, Southwest Region
Mr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS
Mr. Bart Bean, Operations Manager, Western Gas Interstate Company
Mr. Billy Hawkins, Division Manager, Western Gas Interstate Company
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [_71791000164203020243
_]



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
_________________________________________
In the Matter of )
Western Gas Interstate Company, ) CPF No. 4-2010-1001
)
)
)
Respondent. )
_________________________________________ )
FINAL ORDER
On April 14 -17, 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),
conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Western Gas
Interstate Company (WGI or Respondent) in Guymon, Oklahoma. WGI, headquartered in
Midland, Texas, owns and operates 150 miles of natural gas pipeline in the Texas and Oklahoma
Panhandles.
1
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated January 13, 2010, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil
Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the
Notice proposed finding that WGI had violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.463(a) and 192.465(d) and
proposed assessing a civil penalty of $120,000 for the alleged violations. The Notice also
proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations.
Upon requesting and receiving an extension of time, WGI responded to the Notice by letter dated
April 9, 2010, contesting the allegations and requesting a hearing (Response). A hearing was
subsequently held on November 3, 2010, in Houston, Texas, with an attorney from the Office of
Chief Counsel, PHMSA, presiding. After the hearing, Respondent provided additional written
material for the record, by letter dated November 22, 2010 (Closing).
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.463(a), which states, in
relevant part:
1 http://www.westerngasinterstate.com/ (last accessed 6/15/2011).



2
§ 192.463 External corrosion control: Cathodic protection.
(a) Each cathodic protection system required by this subpart must
provide a level of cathodic protection that complies with one or more of
the applicable criteria contained in appendix D of this part….
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.463(a) by failing to demonstrate
that it had provided a level of cathodic protection that complied with one or more of the
applicable criteria contained in appendix D of this part. Specifically, it alleged that WGI’s
procedure “P-192.455, Installation of Cathodic Protection System,
” had identified criteria from
appendix D that the company used to determine adequate cathodic protection. However, another
WGI procedure, Conduct Cathodic Protection Surveys,
acceptable method for determining cathodic protection, which was the negative voltage of at
least 850 millivolts (mv). PHMSA alleged that the company had failed to apply this criteria to
certain pipe segments and that the company’s records and pipe-to-soil potential test operations
revealed several locations that failed to meet the -0.85 mv criteria.
2 described and allowed only one
In Response, WGI presented two defenses. First, the company argued that the pipeline segments
identified in the Notice were uncoated steel that had been constructed and placed in service prior
to August 1, 1971. WGI contended that cathodic protection equipment was not required3 on the
bare pipe installed prior to 1971 in the absence of “active corrosion.
” In support of its position,
the company pointed out that under 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(e)(1), the term “active corrosion” was
defined as “continuing corrosion which, unless controlled, could result in a condition that is
any of the pipeline segments identified in the Notice and that its procedure for providing
detrimental to public safety.” 4 The company contended that active corrosion was not found on
cathodic protection on bare pipe was voluntary and not a regulatory requirement.
Second, the company speculated that the Notice stemmed from a certain ambiguity or imprecise
wording in its Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Manual. WGI acknowledged that its O&M
procedure P-192.465(a) for cathodic protection could be interpreted to imply that WGI intended
to achieve -0.85 mv of cathodic protection for its entire pipeline system, even though that was
neither the company’s intent nor practice. 5
Respondent argued that the Notice identified areas
where WGI’s O&M Manual needed clarification but that it failed to identify a regulatory
violation regarding installation of cathodic protection equipment.
2 WGI Procedure P-192.465(a), Conduct Cathodic Protection Survey. See PHMSA Violation Report, Exhibit A.
3 49 C.F.R. § 192.457(b) states:
(b) Except for cast iron or ductile iron, each of the following buried or submerged
pipelines installed before August 1, 1971, must be cathodically protected in accordance
with this subpart in areas in which active corrosion is found:
(1) Bare or ineffectively coated transmission lines…
4 49 C.F.R. 192.465(e)(1) Response, at 3. This regulation has since been amended (75 FR 48603; Aug. 11, 2010).
5 WGI stated that “certain cathodic protection procedures which were intended to apply only to pipelines installed
after August 1, 1971 could have been read to apply to pipelines installed before August 1, 1971. Closing, at 1.



3
Upon consideration of all of the evidence, I find that the company’s procedures described and
allowed negative voltage of at least 850 mv as the only acceptable method for determining
cathodic protection and that such procedures were not followed with regard to the bare pipe
segments in question here. However, it is clear that the Notice did not allege a failure by
Respondent to follow its own procedures under 49 C.F.R. § 605(a).
6
I further find the evidence does not support a finding of violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.463(a) since
there is no proof that WGI was required to use the negative voltage of at least 850 mv on this
pre-1971 pipe. After the hearing, Respondent subsequently submitted revised procedures in its
Closing. A review of the revised procedures shows that WGI’s procedures are now consistent
with the current regulation and clarify that WGI considers pipelines installed prior to 1971 under
different criteria than those pipelines installed after that date. Based upon the foregoing, I hereby
order that Item 1 of the Notice be withdrawn.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d), which states:
§ 192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.
(a) ….
(d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any
deficiencies indicated by the monitoring.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d) by failing to take prompt
remedial action to correct deficiencies following test readings that showed inadequate levels of
cathodic protection. The supporting allegation of violation in Item 1 was withdrawn; therefore,
this allegation of violation is also withdrawn.
ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY
Under 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed
$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any
related series of violations. In determining the amount of a civil penalty under
49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,
circumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the
degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; the Respondent’s
ability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing
business; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety
regulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without
any reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.
The Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $120,000 for the violations cited above. The
allegations of violation for Items 1 and 2 in the Notice have been withdrawn so therefore the
proposed civil penalty is also withdrawn.
6 I would note that had the agency cited Respondent for a violation of 49 C.F.R. 192.605(a), it is likely that WGI
would have been found in violation, based on the company’s failure to follow its own cathodic protection
procedures.



4
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a Compliance Order with respect to Item 1 and 2 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§192.463(a) and 192.465(d), respectively. The allegations of violations
have been withdrawn. Accordingly, the compliance terms are not included in this Order and no
further action is required.
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has 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 service of this Final Order by
the Respondent, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other
requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.215. The filing of a petition automatically stays the payment of
any civil penalty assessed. Unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a stay, all
other 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
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 19631