# TRINITY PIPELINE GP LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 420135013
- **title:** TRINITY PIPELINE GP LLC — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2013-06-13
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(a), 195.442(c), 195.571, 195.573(a).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420135013.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420135013.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420135013
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420135013
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving TRINITY PIPELINE GP LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(a),  195.442(c),  195.571,  195.573(a). The case was opened on 2013-06-13 and is reported as closed as of 2014-03-31. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

420135013_Closure_03312014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_Closure_03312014.pdf

420135013_Closure_03312014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_Closure_03312014_text.pdf

420135013_Final Order_12192013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_Final%20Order_12192013.pdf

420135013_Final Order_12192013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_Final%20Order_12192013_text.pdf

420135013_NOPV PCO_06132013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_NOPV%20PCO_06132013.pdf

420135013_NOPV PCO_06132013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_NOPV%20PCO_06132013_text.pdf

420135013_Operator Response to Notice_07122013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420135013/420135013_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_07122013.pdf

420135013_Closure_03312014_text.pdf

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
March 31, 2014
Mr. Barry Petty
President and Chief Executive Officer
Trinity Pipeline GP LLC
401 West Wall Street
Midland, Texas 79701
CPF 4-2013-5013
Dear Mr. Petty:
On December 16, 2013, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued to
Trinity Pipeline GP LLC a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This Order included 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

420135013_Final Order_12192013_text.pdf

DECEMBER 19, 2013
Mr. Barry Petty
President & CEO
Trinity Pipeline GP, LLC
401 West Wall Street
Midland, TX 79701
Re: CPF No. 4-2013-5013
Dear Mr. Petty:
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 Trinity Pipeline GP, 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. 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. Rodrick M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, OPS
Mr. Bryan Hargrove, Senior Vice President, Trinity Pipeline GP, LLC
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
In the Matter of )
Trinity Pipeline GP, LLC, ) CPF No. 4-2013-5013
)
)
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
On September 9-14, 2012, and September 17-20, 2012, 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 Trinity Pipeline GP, LLC (Trinity or Respondent), near Seminole, Texas. Trinity
operates a carbon dioxide (CO2) supply and transportation business with approximately 185
miles of CO2 pipeline.1 PHMSA’s inspection covered Trinity’s Hobbs Facility and
approximately 100 miles of CO2 pipeline between Texas and New Mexico.
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated June 13, 2013, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice), which also included a warning pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In
accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Trinity had committed
various violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and ordering Respondent to take certain measures to
correct the alleged violations. The warning item required no further action but warned the
operator to correct the probable violation or face possible enforcement action.
Trinity responded to the Notice by letters dated July 12 and August 5, 2013 (collectively,
Response). The company did not contest the allegations of violation but provided information
concerning the corrective actions it had taken. Respondent did not request a hearing and
therefore has waived its right to one.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
In its Response, Trinity did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.
Part 195, as follows:
1 Trinity website, available at http://www.trinityco2.com/businesses (last accessed December 6, 2013).



2
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a), which states:
§ 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies.
(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline
system a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations
and maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and
emergencies. This manual shall be reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15
months, but at least once each calendar year, and appropriate changes
made as necessary to insure that the manual is effective. This manual shall
be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline system commence, and
appropriate parts shall be kept at locations where operations and
maintenance activities are conducted.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to prepare and
follow its own manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance
activities. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Trinity failed to follow its own Operations &
Maintenance (O&M) Procedures for selecting a repair method for shallow gouges and grooves.
The Notice further alleged that Trinity failed to follow the repair procedures required by ASME
B31.4, referenced in Trinity’s O&M manual, by installing a “Clock Spring” composite sleeve
instead of using one of the three repair methods specified by the manual.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its
own manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a), which states:
§ 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies.
(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline
system a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations
and maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and
emergencies. This manual shall be reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15
months, but at least once each calendar year, and appropriate changes
made as necessary to insure that the manual is effective. This manual shall
be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline system commence, and
appropriate parts shall be kept at locations where operations and
maintenance activities are conducted.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its own
manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that Trinity failed to follow Section 1.14.2, Activity – General, of
its O&M manual, which requires employees performing covered tasks related to corrosion
control to meet minimum training requirements. It alleged that Trinity employees engaged in
corrosion control had not been certified by NACE as “Cathodic Protection Testers,” as required



3
by Trinity’s own procedures.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its
own manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities.
Item 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.571, which states:
§ 195.571 What criteria must I use to determine the adequacy of
cathodic protection?
Cathodic protection required by this Subpart must comply with one or
more of the applicable criteria and other considerations for cathodic
protection contained in paragraphs 6.2 and 6.3 of NACE SP 0169
(incorporated by reference, see §195.3).
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.571 by failing to comply with one
or more of the applicable criteria and other considerations for cathodic protection contained in
paragraph 6.2 of NACE SP 0169. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Trinity failed to consider
the voltage drop required by paragraph 6.2 of NACE SP 0169 when determining the adequacy of
cathodic protection on its pipeline system.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.571 by failing to comply with
the applicable criteria and other considerations for cathodic protection contained in paragraph 6.2
of NACE SP 0169.
Item 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.573(a), which states in
relevant part:
§ 195.573 What must I do to monitor external corrosion control?
(a) Protected pipelines. You must do the following to determine
whether cathodic protection required by this subpart complies with
§195.571:
(1) . . . .
(2) Identify not more than 2 years after cathodic protection is
installed, the circumstances in which a close-interval survey or
comparable technology is practicable and necessary to accomplish the
objectives of paragraph 10.1.1.3 of NACE SP 0169 (incorporated by
reference, see §195.3).
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.573(a) by failing to identify the
circumstances in which a close-interval survey or comparable technology was practicable and
necessary to accomplish the objectives of paragraph 10.1.1.3 of NACE SP 0169. Specifically,
the Notice alleged that Trinity had never completed an interrupted survey or a close-interval
survey on its cathodically protected pipeline, and, therefore, that Trinity had failed to identify,
within the allotted two-year interval, the procedures necessary to accomplish the objectives of



4
paragraph 10.1.1.3 of NACE SP 0169.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.573(a) by failing to identify the
circumstances in which a close-interval survey or comparable technology was practicable and
necessary to accomplish the objectives of paragraph 10.1.1.3 of NACE SP 0169, not more than
two years after cathodic protection was installed on its pipeline system.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.402(a), 195.402(a), 195.571, and 195.573(a), respectively. 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 applicable safety standards established
under chapter 601. The Director has indicated that Respondent has taken the following actions
to address one of the cited violations:
1. With respect to the violation of § 195.402(a) (Item 2), Respondent has ensured
that its employees who are involved in corrosion control have successfully
completed the training specified in its written procedures. Respondent has
provided documentation that its Senior Pipeline Operator successfully completed
NACE CP1 – Cathodic Protection Tester certification in January 2013.
Accordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore,
the compliance terms proposed in the Notice for Item 2 are not included in this Order.
As for the remaining compliance terms, pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and
49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Respondent 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 § 195.402(a) (Item 1), Respondent must submit a
plan to remove the improperly installed clock spring and remediate the defect.
2. With respect to the violation of § 195.571 (Item 4), Respondent must develop a
process for consideration of voltage drop and implement that process. Trinity
must provide PHMSA with the process and the results of the implementation.
3. With respect to the violation of § 195.573(a) (Item 5), Respondent must identify
the circumstances in which a close-interval survey or comparable technology is
practicable and necessary to accomplish the objectives of paragraph 10.1.1.3 of
NACE SP 0169 and conduct a close-interval survey or use comparable
technology as practicable and necessary.



5
4. Respondent must submit plans required by these items within 30 days of receipt
of this Final Order and must implement all corrective actions required by this
Compliance Order within 90 days of receipt of this Final Order.
5. PHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety
improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit
the total to the Director. PHMSA requests that Respondent report these costs in
two categories: (1) total cost associated with preparation and 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 the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an
extension.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in administrative assessment of civil penalties not
to exceed $200,000 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 3, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 195 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. § 195.442(c) (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to properly locate
and mark its buried CO2 pipeline in the area of excavation activity.
Trinity presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to address
the cited item. If OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent
may be subject to future enforcement action.
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
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 15723