{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 42020006NOPV","title":"TRISTATE NLA, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2020-09-30","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 191.17(a), 191.22(c)(2), 191.22(c)(2)(iv), 192.615(c), 192.805(i).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-42020006nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-42020006nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-42020006nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/42020006NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving TRISTATE NLA, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 191.17(a),  191.22(c)(2),  191.22(c)(2)(iv),  192.615(c),  192.805(i). The case was opened on 2020-09-30 and is reported as closed as of 2021-08-09. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n42020006NOPV_Final Order_08092021_(20-171909).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42020006NOPV/42020006NOPV_Final%20Order_08092021_(20-171909).pdf\n\n42020006NOPV_Final Order_08092021_(20-171909)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42020006NOPV/42020006NOPV_Final%20Order_08092021_(20-171909)_text.pdf\n\n42020006NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_12072020_(20-171909).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42020006NOPV/42020006NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_12072020_(20-171909).pdf\n\n42020006NOPV_PCO_09302020_(20-171909).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42020006NOPV/42020006NOPV_PCO_09302020_(20-171909).pdf\n\n42020006NOPV_PCO_09302020_(20-171909)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42020006NOPV/42020006NOPV_PCO_09302020_(20-171909)_text.pdf\n\n42020006NOPV_Final Order_08092021_(20-171909)_text.pdf\n\nAugust 9, 2021\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: marko@tsmidstream.com\nMr. Mark Oliver\nExecutive Vice President of Operations\nTristate NLA, LLC\n9901 Valley Ranch Pkwy E, Suite 2000\nIrving, Texas 75063\nRe: CPF No. 4-2020-006-NOPV\nDear Mr. Oliver:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It withdraws the single\nallegation of violation in the Notice of Probable Violation issued on September 30, 2020\n(Notice). It further contains three warning items as described in the Notice, which require no\nfurther action by Tristate NLA, LLC. Accordingly, this case is now closed. Service of the Final\nOrder by electronic mail is effective upon the date of transmission as provided under 49 C.F.R.\n§ 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nAlan K. Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Ms. Mary McDaniel, Director, Southwest Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMs. Amy Guidry, General Counsel and Executive Vice President, Tristate NLA, LLC,\namyg@tsmidstream.com\nMs. Tonja Holmes, Contract/Regulatory Manager, Tristate NLA, LLC,\ntonjah@tsmidstream.com\nCONFIRMATION OF 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____________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nTristate NLA, LLC, ) CPF No. 4-2020-006-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nDuring the period of March 6, 2020 through July 23, 2020, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a\nrepresentative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and\nrecords of Tristate NLA, LLC (Tristate or Respondent) in Texas and Louisiana. The facilities\ninspected consist of approximately 8.8 miles of regulated interstate gas gathering pipelines in\nTexas and Louisiana.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated September 30, 2020, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed\nCompliance Order (Notice), which also included warnings pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In\naccordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Tristate had committed a\nviolation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.805 and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to\ncorrect the alleged violation. Three warning items required no further action, but warned the\noperator to correct the probable violations or face possible future enforcement action.\nAfter requesting and receiving an extension of time to respond, Tristate responded to the Notice\nby letter dated December 7, 2020 (Response). The company contested the alleged violation, and\nrequested that the proposed compliance order be withdrawn. Respondent did not request a\nhearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nWITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.805(i), which states:\n1 Pipeline Violation Safety Report, at 1 (on file with PHMSA).\n\n\n\nCPF No. 4-2020-006-NOPV\nPage 2\n§ 192.805 Qualification program.\nEach operator shall have and follow a written qualification program.\nThe program shall include provisions to:\n(a) . . . .\n(i) After December 16, 2004, notify the Administrator or a state agency\nparticipating under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 601 if the operator significantly\nmodifies the program after the administrator or state agency has verified\nthat it complies with this section. Notifications to PHMSA may be\nsubmitted by electronic mail to InformationResourcesManager@dot.gov,\nor by mail to ATTN: Information Resources Manager DOT/PHMSA/OPS,\nEast Building, 2nd Floor, E22-321, New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,\nDC 20590.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.805(i) by failing to notify PHMSA\nof significant modifications to its operator qualification (OQ) program after PHMSA had verified\nthat it complied with § 192.805. Specifically, Tristate failed to notify PHMSA of changes to its\nOQ plan that resulted from its acquisition of Gulf South pipeline on May 1, 2019.\nIn its Response, Tristate contested the allegation and divided its argument into three parts. First,\nTristate contended that there were no changes to the OQ program as a result of the acquisition.\nSpecifically, Tristate argued that § 192.805 provides the requirements of an OQ program, and that\nutilizing the full list of OQ requirements, a merger/acquisition (M&A) alone would not alter the\nOQ program. Further, Tristate reasoned that the intent of § 192.805(a)(i) is to notify the regulating\nagency of a modification to the program so that the agency is aware that the program may no\nlonger comply with the code. An M&A alone would not alter the OQ program such that it no\nlonger complies with the requirements in § 192.805.\nWhile Tristate agreed that changes to the M&A section of the OQ plan would create a significant\nmodification to the OQ program, Tristate contended that it has not made any change to Section\n4.1, which covers the training requirements during an M&A.\nTristate further argued that an M&A change is unlike an M&A itself. Specifically, Tristate\nreasoned that in PHMSA’s advisory bulletin, ADB-09-03, the list of “significant” modifications\nincludes all subjects directly related to the OQ program and how it is implemented, and that an\nacquisition of additional pipeline facilities is not directly related to how the program is\nimplemented. Additionally, PHMSA’s OQ Enforcement Guidance suggests an OQ program\nshould have a procedure for M&A. Finally, § 191.22(c)(2)(iv) covers the notification for\nacquisitions of 50 or more miles of pipe, and that a finding that an M&A of 50 or more miles of\npipe requires a notification under the OQ program would cause a regulatory redundancy.\nSecond, Tristate contended that the acquisition of Gulf South pipeline did not trigger any\nregulatory requirement for a review and update of the OQ program. Specifically, ADB-09-03\nadvises operators to conduct reviews of the OQ program in conjunction with the reviews of the\noperations and maintenance (O&M) program, which Tristate has conducted annually.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 4-2020-006-NOPV\nPage 3\nThird, Tristate contended that Section 5.1.1 of its OQ program covers communication of change\nwithin Tristate and its contractors, and does not place any requirement on notification to PHMSA.\nSpecifically, Section 5.1 introduces the Communication of Change section and adequately\ndescribes the applicability of the section to individuals performing Covered Tasks, and therefore,\nis not an appropriate place to include notification to PHMSA. Instead, Tristate explains that\nSection 1.5.2 currently satisfies the regulatory requirements of Notification to PHMSA under §\n192.805(i) and any addition of examples of significant changes would be a suggested change, not\na required change. Specifically, Section 1.5.2 states, “…when significant changes are made to this\nplan, Tristate will notify the Office of Pipeline Safety or the participating state pipeline safety\noffice, as appropriate, of those changes…significant means any change that could reasonably be\nexpected to put the adequacy of this program in question.”\nHaving reviewed the Response, I find that Tristate’s arguments have merit and the allegation of\nviolation alleged in the Notice should be withdrawn. It should be noted that on March 17, 2021,\nsubsequent to the issuance of the Notice, Tristate submitted to PHMSA revised procedures for its\nOQ program that included M&A changes pursuant to § 192.805(i).\nAccordingly, after considering Tristate’s Response, I find that the M&A at issue in this case did\nnot result in changes to Tristate’s OQ program, and thus did not require notification under the\nregulation cited. Based upon the foregoing, I hereby order that the alleged violation of\n§ 192.805(i) and associated proposed compliance order be withdrawn.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 1, 2, and 3, the Notice alleged probable violations of Parts 191 and 192,\nbut identified them as warning items pursuant to § 190.205. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 191.17 (Item 1) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to submit DOT Form PHMSA\n7100.2-1 for calendar year 2019 for its gas gathering system as required by March 15,\n2020. Tristate submitted the required annual report on April 20, 2020 (36 days late);\n49 C.F.R. § 191.22 (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to file a Type D, acquisition\nnotification, to the National Registry of Pipeline and LNG operators for approximately\n100.47 miles of a gas transmission pipeline purchased from Gulf South no later than 60\ndays following acquisition in accordance with § 191.22(c)(2)(iv). Tristate submitted its\nType D acquisition notice 196 days later than required by the time frame specified in\n§ 191.22(c)(2)(iv); and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.615 (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to establish and maintain\nliaisons with all appropriate emergency responders and other public officials in accordance\nwith § 192.615(c)(2). Tristate is required to learn the responsibility and resources of each\ngovernment organization that may respond to a gas pipeline emergency and acquaint the\npublic officials with Tristate’s ability to respond to a gas pipeline emergency as it traverses\nCaddo Parish, Louisiana and Panola County, Texas.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 4-2020-006-NOPV\nPage 4\nIf OPS finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be\nsubject to future enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nAugust 9, 2021\n___________________________________ _________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":11193}