{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 42025039NOPV","title":"EAST TENNESSEE NATURAL GAS, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2025-07-03","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 193.2441(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-42025039nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-42025039nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-42025039nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/42025039NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving EAST TENNESSEE NATURAL GAS, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 193.2441(c). The case was opened on 2025-07-03 and is reported as closed as of 2026-03-03. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n42025039NOPV_Closure Letter_03032026_(24-298760).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_Closure%20Letter_03032026_(24-298760).pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_Closure Letter_03032026_(24-298760)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_Closure%20Letter_03032026_(24-298760)_text.pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_Final Order_11242025_(24-298760).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_Final%20Order_11242025_(24-298760).pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_Final Order_11242025_(24-298760)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_Final%20Order_11242025_(24-298760)_text.pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_Operator Petition for Reconsideration_12152025_(24-298760).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_Operator%20Petition%20for%20Reconsideration_12152025_(24-298760).pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_07312025_(24-298760).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_07312025_(24-298760).pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_PCO_07032025_(24-298760).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_PCO_07032025_(24-298760).pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_PCO_07032025_(24-298760)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/42025039NOPV/42025039NOPV_PCO_07032025_(24-298760)_text.pdf\n\n42025039NOPV_Final Order_11242025_(24-298760)_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nNovember 24, 2025\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cynthia.hansen@enbridge.com\nCynthia Hansen\nExecutive Vice President and President\nGas Transmission and Midstream\nEnbridge, Inc.\n915 North Eldridge Parkway\nSuite 1100\nHouston, Texas 77079\nRe: CPF No. 4-2025-039-NOPV\nDear Ms. Hansen:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of\nviolation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Enbridge, Inc., to comply with the\npipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been completed, as\ndetermined by the Director, Southwest Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of\nthe Final Order by e-mail is effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of\nreceipt as provided under 49 CFR § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nLinda Daugherty\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Bryan Jeffrey Lethcoe, Director, Southwest Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nPeter Seydewitz, Director, Operational Excellence, Enbridge, Inc.,\npeter.seydewitz@enbridge.com\nAndrew Kohout, Director, Division of LNG Facility Reviews and Inspections Office of\nEnergy Products, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Andrew.kohout@ferc.gov\n\n\n\n2\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 )\nEast Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC, ) CPF No. 4-2025-039-NOPV\na subsidiary of Enbridge, Inc., )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom June 4 through June 6, 2024, pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), a\nrepresentative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), inspected East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC’s (ETNG) Kingsport LNG\nfacility in Kingsport, Tennessee. ETNG is a subsidiary of Enbridge, Inc (Enbridge).1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated July 3, 2025, a Notice of Probable Violation (NOPV) and Proposed\nCompliance Order (PCO) (collectively, “Notice”). In accordance with 49 CFR § 190.207, the\nNotice proposed finding that Enbridge committed one violation of 49 CFR Part 193 and\nproposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violation.\nEnbridge responded to the Notice by letter dated July 31, 2025 (Response). Respondent did not\nrequest a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR Part 193, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 193.2441(c), which states:\n§ 193.2441 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\nEach LNG plant must have a control center from which operations\nand warning devices are monitored as required by this part. A control\ncenter must have the following capabilities and characteristics:\n1 See Natural gas transmission, midstream and LNG, ENBRIDGE https://www.enbridge.com/About-Us/Natural-Gas-\nTransmission-Midstream-and-LNG (last accessed September 26, 2025).\n\n\n\n2\n(a) ….\n(c) Each control center must have personnel in continuous\nattendance while any of the components under its control are in\noperation, unless the control is being performed from another control\ncenter which has personnel in continuous attendance.\nThe Notice alleged that Enbridge violated 49 CFR § 193.2441(c) by failing to have personnel in\ncontinuous attendance in its control center or alternate control center while any of the\ncomponents under its control were in operation. Specifically, the Notice alleged that at ETNG’s\nKingsport LNG facility, between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday,\nand for the entirety of Saturday and Sunday, only one control room operator was required to be\nin attendance in the control room. The Notice further alleged that during these shifts the\ncontroller was required to perform roving patrols every two hours, during which time there was\nno primary or alternate control room coverage by personnel. During the PHMSA inspection,\nETNG personnel stated that continuous attendance in the control room was not in effect\novernight or during weekend shifts.\nIn its Response, Enbridge stated that it implemented a “mobile solution” at the Kingsport LNG\nfacility after receiving the Notice, and that the mobile solution “provides for the on-duty control\ncenter operator, via a mobile human interface (HMI) device, the necessary monitoring and\ncontrol functionality of the onsite control center’s SCADA while absent from the control center.”\nEnbridge claimed this solution “allows for continuous monitoring and control…as well as\nimmediate response capabilities… for any operational issue or emergency that may arise while\nthe operator is briefly absent from the control center.” In addition, Enbridge noted that in an\nadvance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANRPM) issued on May 5, 2025, PHMSA requested\ncomments on updating Part 193 to incorporate the requirements in NFPA 59A-2023 by\nreference.\n2 Enbridge stated that the provisions in NFPA 59A-2023, section 18.6.1.1, align with\nthe practices being employed at the Kingsport LNG facility at the time of the inspection. Finally,\nEnbridge requested that this Item be changed to a Notice of Amendment (NOA) or Warning,\nasserting that previous agency enforcement actions with similar facts were not brought via an\nNOPV.\nIn the Region Recommendation (Recommendation), the Southwest Region Director\nrecommended that the allegation of violation in Item 1 of the Notice be sustained. The Director\nacknowledged the ANPRM cited by Enbridge but noted that it is the language of § 193.2441(c)\nthat is currently in effect. Regarding Enbridge’s HMI device, the Director noted the Response\ndid not include a description of how the device will be used when immediate intervention is\nrequired due to sudden changes in operating conditions or potential failures of components\nduring operations. Updated procedures demonstrating the use of the HMI device in operations\nmonitoring and the training of control room operators to use the devices were not provided in the\nResponse.\nAfter considering all of the evidence, I find that Enbridge violated 49 CFR § 193.2441(c) as\nalleged in Item 1 of the Notice. Enbridge does not dispute that ETNG failed to have personnel in\ncontinuous attendance in its control center or at an alternate control center while any of the\n2 See Pipeline Safety: Amendments to Liquified Natural Gas Facilities, 90 Fed. Reg. 18949 (May 5, 2025).\n\n\n\n3\ncomponents under its control were in operation at the Kingsport LNG facility. Nor does\nEnbridge dispute that ETNG had an obligation to ensure such continuous personnel attendance\nunder § 193.2441(c).\nRather, Enbridge requests relief based on the mobile solution that ETNG implemented after\nreceiving the Notice, and by pointing to the provisions in NFPA 59A-2023, which are not\nincorporated by reference in Part 193. Neither of these arguments provides grounds for excusing\nETNG’s failure to comply with the requirements in § 193.2441(c).\nAs for Enbridge’s request to convert the alleged violation to an NOA or Warning, PHMSA has\ndiscretion in determining the types of enforcement actions that should be brought under Part 190.\nPHMSA has issued three prior enforcement actions addressing § 193.2441(c). One was brought\nas an NOPV,3 one was brought as an NOA,4 and one was brought as a Warning.5 An NOPV,\nwhich alleges that a person has not complied with 49 U.S.C. § 60101 et seq., 33 U.S.C. 1321(j),\nor any regulation or order issued thereunder, is an appropriate enforcement action to use in this\n6\ncase.\nFor these reasons, I find that Enbridge committed the violation alleged in Item 1 of the Notice.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1 in the Notice for violation of 49\nCFR § 193.2241(c). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person owning or operating a pipeline\nfacility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under chapter 601.\nIn its Response, Enbridge described the HMI device that it implemented at the Kingsport LNG\nfacility to “allow[] for continuous monitoring and control…as well as immediate response\ncapabilities… for any operational issue or emergency that may arise while the operator is briefly\nabsent from the control center.” This remedial action may be sufficient. However, as noted by\nthe Director in his Recommendation, the Response did not include a description of how the\ndevice will be used when immediate intervention is required due to sudden changes in operating\nconditions or potential failures of components during operations. Updated procedures\ndemonstrating the use of the HMI device in operations monitoring and the training of control\nroom operators to use the devices were not provided in the Response. Therefore, I cannot\nconclude that Enbridge has satisfied the proposed compliance order and met its regulatory\nrequirement.\nTherefore, pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 CFR § 190.217, Respondent\nis ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety regulations\napplicable to its operations:\n3 In re Interior Gas Utility, CPF 4-2023-006-NOPV (May 8, 2023).\n4 In re Eagle LNG Partners, CPF 4-2024-041-NOA (August 28, 2024).\n5 In re Chesapeake Utilities Corp., CPF 4-2024-050-WL (October 22, 2024).\n6 49 CFR 190.207(a).\n\n\n\n4\n1. With respect to the violation of § 193.2441(c) (Item 1), Enbridge must develop\nand implement an operations procedure requiring personnel to be in continuous\nattendance in its Kingsport LNG facility Control Room in accordance with §\n193.2441(c) within 45 days of receipt of the Final Order.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an\nextension.\nPHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director. It is\nrequested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nexceeding $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (see 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts), for\neach violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for\nappropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nUnder 49 CFR § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final\nOrder to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey\nAvenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of\nChief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. The written petition must be received no later than\n20 days after receipt of the Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a\nstatement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 CFR § 190.243. The terms of the\norder, including corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon\nrequest, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in\naccordance with 49 CFR § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nLinda Daugherty Date Issued\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n42025039NOPV_Closure Letter_03032026_(24-298760)_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration 8701 S. Gessner, Suite 630\nHouston TX 77074\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cynthia.hansen@enbridge.com\nMarch 3, 2026\nCynthia Hansen\nExecutive Vice President and President\nEnbridge, Inc.\n915 North Eldridge Pkwy, Suite 1100\nHouston, Texas 77079\nRE: CPF 4-2025-039-NOPV\nDear Ms. Hansen:\nFrom June 4 to 6, 2024, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) inspected\nEast Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC’s1 (ETNG) liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in Kingsport,\nTennessee.\nAs a result of the inspection, ETNG was issued a Final Order on November 24, 2025. The Final\nOrder included a Compliance Order. Based on additional information you have provided, and the\nsubsequent meeting and demonstration conducted with Southwest Region personnel, it has been\ndetermined that ETNG has successfully complied with the terms of the Order.\nThis letter is to inform you no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank you\nfor your cooperation.\nSincerely,\nBryan Lethcoe\nDirector, Southwest Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Peter Seydewitz, Director, Operational Excellence, Enbridge, Inc.,\npeter.seydewitz@enbridge.com\nAndrew Kohout, Director, Division of LNG Facility Reviews and Inspections - Office of\nEnergy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,\nAndrew.Kohout@ferc.gov\nAnnie Cook, Outside Counsel for ETNG, annie.cook@bracewell.com\n1 East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC, is a subsidiary of Enbridge, Inc.","truncated":false,"body_characters":15485}