{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420121021","title":"TEXAS GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2012-12-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.475(a), 192.605(a), 192.605(b)(2).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420121021.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420121021.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420121021","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420121021","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving TEXAS GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.475(a),  192.605(a),  192.605(b)(2). The case was opened on 2012-12-19 and is reported as closed as of 2013-05-29. Proposed civil penalty: $100,000. Assessed civil penalty: $100,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420121021_Final Order_05292013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420121021/420121021_Final%20Order_05292013.pdf\n\n420121021_Final Order_05292013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420121021/420121021_Final%20Order_05292013_text.pdf\n\n420121021_NOPV PCP_12192012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420121021/420121021_NOPV%20PCP_12192012.pdf\n\n420121021_NOPV PCP_12192012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420121021/420121021_NOPV%20PCP_12192012_text.pdf\n\n420121021_Operator Response to Notice_01182013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420121021/420121021_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_01182013.pdf\n\n420121021_Final Order_05292013_text.pdf\n\nMAY 29, 2013\nMr. Rolf A. Gafvert\nPresident\nTexas Gas Transmission, LLC\n3800 Frederica Street\nOwensboro, KY 42301\nRe: CPF No. 4-2012-1021\nDear Mr. Gafvert:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding\nof violation and assesses a civil penalty of $100,000. This is to acknowledge receipt of\npayment of the full penalty amount, by wire transfer, dated January 18, 2013. This\nenforcement action is now closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed\neffective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Richard Keyser, Senior VP Operations, Texas Gas Transmission LLC,\n9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, TX 77046\nMr. R.M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, OPS\nMr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN 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____________________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nTexas Gas Transmission, LLC, ) CPF No. 4-2012-1021\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn August 4, 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), initiated\nan investigation of an incident involving the pipeline system of Texas Gas Transmission, LLC\n(Texas Gas or Respondent). Texas Gas, a subsidiary of Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP,\noperates approximately 6,100 miles of natural gas pipelines from the Gulf of Mexico to the\nMidwest and Northeast.1\nThe investigation arose out of an incident on Respondent’s Roanoke-Grand Chenier 20”\npipeline, near Grand Chenier, Louisiana. On August 4, 2009, a pinhole leak occurred on the 20”\npipeline, resulting in a release of natural gas. Texas Gas submitted an incident report, dated\nAugust 31, 2009, that indicated the apparent cause of the failure as internal corrosion. No\nproperty damage or injuries resulted from the incident.\nAs a result of the investigation, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated December 19, 2012, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed\nCivil Penalty (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding\nthat Texas Gas had violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a) and proposed assessing a civil penalty of\n$100,000 for the alleged violation. The Notice also included a warning item that required no\nfurther action, but warned the operator to correct the probable violation or face future potential\nenforcement action.\nTexas Gas responded to the Notice by letter dated January 18, 2013 (Response). The company\ndid not contest the allegation of violation and paid the proposed civil penalty of $100,000, as\nprovided in 49 C.F.R. § 190.227. Payment of the penalty serves to close the case with prejudice\nto Respondent.\n1 http://www.txgt.com/AboutUsTXGT.aspx (last accessed on March 13, 2013).\n\n\n\n2\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Texas Gas did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated\n49 C.F.R. Part 192.605(a), as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605, which states in\nrelevant part:\n§ 192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and\nemergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline,\na manual of written procedures for conducting operations and maintenance\nactivities and for emergency response.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a) by failing to follow its own\nwritten corrosion control procedures for monitoring internal corrosion on its Roanoke-Grand\nChenier 20” pipeline system, in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 192.475.2 Specifically, the Notice\nalleged that Texas Gas failed to follow its own Corrosion Control Procedures, OM.20.11.01.06\nand Internal Corrosion Manual3, which requires operational dead legs4 be flushed when possible,\nas the settling of water in dead legs and low points may lead to internal corrosion. During the\ninvestigation, the OPS inspector discovered that Texas Gas had also failed to follow Procedures,\nOM.20.11.01.06, by not monitoring chemical injections for internal corrosion. Respondent had\none probe on the upstream section of the pipeline and had not injected inhibitor5 in the pipeline\nsince April 2004.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a) by failing to follow its\nown written corrosion control procedures for monitoring internal corrosion on its Roanoke-\nGrand Chenier 20” pipeline system.\nThis finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken against Respondent.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\n2 § 192.475 Internal corrosion control: General.\n(a) Corrosive gas may not be transported by pipeline, unless the corrosive effect of the gas on the pipeline has been\ninvestigated and steps have been taken to minimize internal corrosion.\n3 Pipeline Safety Violation Report (Dec. 19, 2012) (on file with PHMSA), Exhibit A.\n4 Dead legs are parts of the pipeline system that experience low or no flow, where liquids can collect within the\npipeline and could result in failures because of internal corrosion.\n5 An inhibitor is a substance that, when added in small concentrations, decreases the effective corrosion rate.\n\n\n\n3\nrelated series of violations. In determining the amount of a civil penalty under\n49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; the Respondent’s\nability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing\nbusiness; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without\nany reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $100,000 for the violations cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $100,000 for Respondent’s violation of\n49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a), for failing to follow its own written corrosion control procedures for\nmonitoring internal corrosion on its Roanoke-Grand Chenier 20” pipeline system, in accordance\nwith 49 C.F.R. § 192.475(a). Pipeline safety regulations require an operator to follow its own\nwritten corrosion control procedures for monitoring internal corrosion and to take action to\nprevent corrosion by the use of inhibitors in the gas, the use of cleaning pigs, the removal of\nliquids and solids from drips, and monitoring of contaminants. The evidence shows that\nRespondent is fully culpable for failing to follow its procedures, which could have resulted in\nserious safety and environmental consequences. Respondent did not contest the allegation.\nTexas Gas paid the proposed penalty for the alleged violation, which serves to close this Item\nwith prejudice. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria,\nI assess Respondent a civil penalty of $100,000, which amount has already been paid by\nRespondent for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a).\nWARNING ITEM\nWith respect to Item 2, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 192 but did not propose a\ncivil penalty or compliance order for this item. Therefore, this is considered to be a warning\nitem. The warning was for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.605(b)(2) (Item 2) - Respondent’s alleged failure to have\nmaintenance and operations procedures for monitoring low flow or no flow\npipelines for internal corrosion.\nTexas Gas presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to\naddress the cited items. If OPS finds a violation of this provision, Respondent may be subject to\nfuture enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":9907}