EAST TENNESSEE NATURAL GAS, LLC (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP) — Notice of Probable Violation

party submissionOfficial PDF42022026NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_03252022_(21-209158).pdf#

case documentOfficial PDF42022026NOPV_PCO_01262022_(21-209158).pdf#

case documentOfficial PDF42022026NOPV_PCO_01262022_(21-209158)_text.pdf#

42022026NOPV_Final Order_12162022_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFDecember 16, 2022 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cynthia.hansen@enbridge.com Ms. Cynthia Hansen Executive Vice President and President Gas Transmission and Midstream Enbridge Inc. 915 North Eldridge Parkway Houston, Texas 77079 Re: CPF No. 4-2022-026-NOPV Dear Ms. Hansen: 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 East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC, a subsidiary of Enbridge Inc., 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 e-mail is effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt as provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Alan K. Mayberry Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety Enclosure cc: Mr. Bryan Lethcoe, Director, Southwest Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA Mr. Nathan Atanu, Manager, Operational Compliance, Enbridge Inc., nathan.atanu@enbridge.com CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQESTED#

42022026NOPV_Final Order_12162022_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 2U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 ____________________________________ ) In the Matter of ) ) East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC, ) CPF No. 4-2022-026-NOPV a subsidiary of Enbridge Inc., ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) FINAL ORDER From July 12 through August 17, 2021, 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 Peak Shaving Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility and records of East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC (ETNG or Respondent) in Sullivan County, Tennessee. ETNG, a subsidiary of Enbridge Inc., operates a natural gas pipeline system along with an LNG storage facility located near Kingsport, Tennessee.1 As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent, by letter dated January 26, 2022, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that ETNG committed three violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 193 and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. After requesting and receiving an extension of time to respond, Enbridge, Inc., on behalf of ETNG, responded to the Notice by letter dated March 25, 2022 (Response). The company did not contest the allegations of violation but requested clarification and revision of certain requirements in the Proposed Compliance Order. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one. FINDINGS OF VIOLATION In its Response, ETNG did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part 193, as follows: 1 Enbridge Inc. website, available at https://www.enbridge.com/map#map:infrastructure,search=%22east%20tennessee%20can%20deliver%22 (last accessed Nov. 21, 2022).#

42022026NOPV_Final Order_12162022_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 3Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § § 193.2619(c), which states: § 193.2619 Control systems. (a) . . . (c) Control systems in service, but not normally in operation, such as relief valves and automatic shutdown devices, and control systems for internal shutoff valves for bottom penetration tanks must be inspected and tested once each calendar year, not exceeding 15 months, with the following exceptions: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2619(c) by failing to inspect and test relief valves at least once each calendar month, not exceeding 15 months. 2 Specifically, the Notice alleged that ETNG failed to provide records to demonstrate that testing was performed on the LNG tank relief valves at the requisite intervals. 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. § 193.2619(c) for failing to inspect and test LNG tank relief valves at least once each calendar month, not exceeding 15 months. Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2801, which states: § 193.2801 Fire protection. Each operator must provide and maintain fire protection at LNG plants according to sections 9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of NFPA-59A-2001 (incorporated by reference, see § 193.2013). However, LNG plants existing on March 31, 2000, need not comply with provisions on emergency shutdown systems, water delivery systems, detection systems, and personnel qualification and training until September 12, 2005. The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2801 by failing to provide and maintain fire protection at LNG plants according to sections 9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of NFPA-59A-2001. Specifically, the Notice alleged two instances of violation. First, ETNG failed to include an evaluation to determine the type, quantity, and location of equipment necessary for the detection and control of fires, leaks, and spills of LNG, flammable refrigerants, or flammable gases, and potential non-process and electrical fires as required in section 9.1.2 of NFPA-59A-2001. Second, ETNG failed to design an adequate fire water supply and distribution system in accordance with section 9.4.2 of NFPA-59A-2001. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation.3 Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2801 by failing to provide and maintain fire protection at LNG plants according to sections 9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of 2 See also 49 C.F.R. § 193.2619(e) (requiring operators to inspect and test relief valves for verification of the valve seat lifting pressure and reseating). 3 In its Response, ETNG provided additional information to support its contention that it complied with the regulatory requirement, despite its decision to not contest a finding of violation. Response, at 4.#

42022026NOPV_Final Order_12162022_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 4NFPA-59A-2001. Item 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2911, which states: § 193.2911 Security lighting. Where security warning systems are not provided for security monitoring under § 193.2913, the area around the facilities listed under § 193.2905(a) and each protective enclosure must be illuminated with a minimum in service lighting intensity of not less than 2.2 lux (0.2 ft c) between sunset and sunrise. The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 193.2911 by failing to illuminate the area around the facility listed under § 193.2905(a) and each protective enclosure with a minimum in service lighting intensity of not less than 2.2 lux between sunset and sunrise. Specifically, the Notice alleged that ETNG failed to provide the requisite security lighting at its Peak Shaving LNG facility between sunset and sunrise. 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. § 193.2911 by failing to illuminate the area around the LNG facility with a minimum in service lighting intensity of not less than 2.2 lux between sunset and sunrise. 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, and 3 in the Notice for violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 193.2619(c), 193.2801, and 193.2911, respectively. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under chapter 601. With regard to the violation of § 193.2801 (Item 2), Respondent claimed that the compliance terms set forth in the Proposed Compliance Order for Item 2 should be clarified and revised.4 On April 5, 2022, ETNG and OPS (collectively, the parties) met to discuss the compliance terms and the proposed revisions.5 As a result, the parties agreed to revise the compliance terms for Item 2 as set forth more fully below. 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: 4 Response, at 5-6. 5 Region Recommendation, at 2-3 (on file with PHMSA).#

42022026NOPV_Final Order_12162022_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 51. With respect to the violation of § 193.2619(c) (Item 1), Respondent must inspect and test relief valves on LNG tanks for verification of the valve seat lifting pressure and reseating. ETNG must develop procedures for LNG Tank relief valves inspection and testing. ETNG must complete this item and provide documentation of such to the Director within 30 days after receipt of a Final Order. 2. With respect to the violation of § 193.2801 (Item 2), Respondent must perform an evaluation in accordance with NFPA-59A-2001 Section 9.1.2. ETNG must re- evaluate the Hydraulic Gradient Testing and Fire Hazard Mitigation Analysis (Report) to exclude the pumper truck to demonstrate that ETNG meets NFPA-59A- 2001 Section 9.1.2. The re-evaluation must include the following: (i) the scenarios of the fixed fire protection systems at the facility to simulate the requirement of firewater demands; (ii) clarity on the firefighting process including training and drills for first responders; and (iii) a basis for the estimated time to respond following the initial ignition of a flammable release. ETNG must perform the evaluation described above and provide documentation of such to the Director within 30 days after receipt of a Final Order. Further, ETNG must design a firewater supply and distribution system in accordance with NFPA-59A-2001 Section 9.4.2. The design shall provide simultaneous supply of fixed fire protection systems at their design flow and pressure, involved in the maximum single incident expected in the plant plus an allowance of 1,000 gpm (63 L/sec) for hand hose streams for not less than two hours. ETNG must include the coverage of gas and UV detectors at the facility in accordance with NFPA-59-A-2001 Section 9.1.2. ETNG must complete design criteria and provide documentation of such to the Director within 30 days after receipt of a Final Order. 3. With respect to the violation of § 193.2911 (Item 3), Respondent must provide minimum in-service lighting intensity of 2.2 lux between sunset and sunrise to areas around facilities listed under § 193.2905(a), and each protective enclosure where security warning systems are not provided for security monitoring under § 193.2913. ETNG must complete this item within 30 days after receipt of a Final Order. 4. With respect to Items 2 and 3 of this Order, ETNG must complete all improvements resulting from design or evaluations within 90 days and provide documentation to the Director after receipt of a Final Order. 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. PHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director. It is requested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated with#

42022026NOPV_Final Order_12162022_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 6preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties not to exceed $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (see 49 C.F.R. § 190.223), 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. Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final Order to the 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. The written petition must be received no later than 20 days after receipt of the Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a statement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The terms of the order, including corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.5. December 16, 2022 ___________________________________ __________________________ Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety#

42022026NOPV_Closure Letter_04072025_(21-209158)_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cynthia.hansen@enbridge.com April 7, 2025 Cynthia Hansen Executive Vice President East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC 915 North Eldridge Parkway, Houston, Texas 77079 RE: CPF 4-2022-026-NOPV Dear Ms. Hansen: On December 16, 2022, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued to East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC (ETNG), 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 ETNG 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, Bryan Lethcoe Director, Southwest Region, Office of Pipeline Safety Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration cc: Harold North, Senior Engineer of Operational Compliance, harold.north@enbridge.com Leo Rosas Jr., Supervisor of Operational Compliance, leo.rosasjr@enbridge.com Andrew Kohout, P.E., Director, Division of LNG Facility Reviews and Inspections, Office of Energy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, andrew.kohout@ferc.gov#