# EXPRESS HOLDINGS (USA), LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 520055035
- **title:** EXPRESS HOLDINGS (USA), LLC — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2005-11-16
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.467(d), 195.402(d)(5), 195.577(a).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520055035.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520055035.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520055035
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520055035
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving EXPRESS HOLDINGS (USA), LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.467(d),  195.402(d)(5),  195.577(a). The case was opened on 2005-11-16 and is reported as closed as of 2009-01-26. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520055035_FinalOrder_05122008.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520055035/520055035_FinalOrder_05122008.pdf

520055035_finalorder_05122008_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520055035/520055035_finalorder_05122008_text.pdf

520055035_finalorder_05122008_text.pdf

O
U S Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety
Administration
Mr. Hugh Harden
Vice-President, Operations 8c Engmeermg
Kinder Morgan Pipelines (USA), Inc.
300 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2700
Calgary, Alberta
CANADA T2PSJ2
12nio I'hew. 'ersey A. e S E
Weshrngrnn DC . n690
~y 1" 2008
Re: CPF No. 5-2005-5035
Dear Mr. Harden:
Enclosed is the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation and finds that Kinder Morgan has completed part of the actions specified in the Notice
required to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the Compliance
Order have been completed, as determined by the Director, Western Region, this enforcement
action will be closed. Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service 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. Chris Hoidal, P. E.
,
Director Western Region, PHMSA
CERTIFIED MAIL — RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED



U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
In the Matter of
Kinder Morgan Pipelines (USA), Inc.
formerly Terasen Pipeline (USA), Inc. )
Respondent.
)
)
)
, )
)
)
CPF No. 5-2005-5035
FINAL ORDER
On June 20-24 and July 18-22, 2005, pursuant to 49 U. S. C. ) 60117, representatives of the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's (PHMSA's) Office of Pipeline Safety
conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the records, procedures, and facilities of the
Express Pipeline system that extends from the Canada/Montana border to Caspar, Wyoming. At
the time of such inspection, Express Pipeline was operated by Terasen Pipeline (USA), Inc.
,
whose successor is Kinder Morgan Pipelines (USA), Inc. (Kinder Morgan or Respondent). As a
result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated November 16, 2005, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C. F. R. $ 190, 207, the Notice proposed
finding that Respondent committed violations of 49 C. F. R. Part 195 and proposed ordering
Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also contained
a warning that Respondent had committed certain other probable violations of 49 C. F. R. Part 195
and advised Respondent to take appropriate corrective actions.
Respondent responded to the Notice by letter dated December 20, 2005 (Response). Respondent
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.
FINDING OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F, R. Part 195 as follows:
Item 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. )) 195. 571 and 195. 577(a),
which state:



g 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
Standard RP0169 (incorporated by reference, see $ 195. 3).
g 195. 577 What must I do to alleviate interference currents?
(a) For pipelines exposed to stray currents, you must have a
program to identify, test for, and minimize the detrimental effects
of such currents.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent failed to determine the adequacy of cathodic
protection and alleviate interference currents. At the time of the inspection, there were
approximately 30 test stations on the Express Pipeline that had IR-free pipe-to-soil potential
(P/S) readings more negative than -1250 mV. These conditions violated NACE Standard RP
0169-96, Section 6. 2. 2. 3. 3 regarding the use of excessive polarized potentials on externally
coated pipelines.
In its Response, Respondent did not contest the violations alleged in Item 3. Accordingly, I find
that Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. $$ 195. 571 and 195. 577(a), as more fully described in the
Notice.
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 Item 3 in the Notice. 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. 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 with respect to the Express Pipeline in Wyoming and
Montana. Respondent must-
1. With respect to Notice Item 3, confirm the accuracy of Kinder Morgan's electrical
testing methodologies and instruments;
Maintain dociunentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling
this Compliance Order and submit the total to Director, Western Region, OPS. Costs
shall be reported in two categories: 1) total costs associated with preparation/revision
of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and 2) total costs associated with
replacements, additions and other changes to Respondent's pipeline infrastructure;
and



Within 60 days of receipt of the Final Order, submit documentation of procedures,
costs and evidence of actions taken to the Director, Western Region, OPS, Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite
110, Lakewood, Colorado 80228. Please refer to CPF No. 5-2005-5035 on any
correspondence or communication in these matters.
The Director, Western Region, may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the
required items upon a written request timely submitted by Respondent demonstrating good cause
for an extension.
The Regional Director has indicated that Respondent has already addressed the following items
specified in the Proposed Compliance Order:
1. With respect to Proposed Compliance Order Item 2, Respondent submitted evidence
of a typographical error in the recorded reading at station 23702+12. The actual IR
free pipe-to-soil potential (P/S) reading did not indicate electrical interference.
Respondent submitted records of the annual cathodic protection survey for 2005
(conducted July 29, 2005) for station 25287+78. The current P/S readings do not
indicate electrical interference; and
2. With respect to Proposed Compliance Order Item 3, Respondent submitted excavated
pipe anomalies that were revealed as a result of an in-line inspection. The anomalies
were about 100 feet from the suspected areas of interference. The pipe coating was
evaluated as excellent and not damaged. Respondent completed several
modifications to its piping and electrical isolation at various pump stations. In
addition, the 2005 annual P/S survey indicates that IR-free P/S readings are now
much less negative — none were more negative than 1. 25 Volts. Therefore, there is no
need to take additional action to address potential pipe coating damage.
Accordingly, since Respondent has submitted information that the Regional Director deems
satisfactory with respect to these portions of the Proposed Compliance Order, the proposed
compliance terms for items 2 and 3 are not included in this Order.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
of not more than $100, 000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to
the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a United States District Court.
WARNING ITEMS
The Notice also alleged probable violations of 49 C. F. R. Part 195 but did not propose a civil
penalty or Compliance Order for Notice Item I (49 C. F. R. $1 195. 404(c)(3) and 195. 402(d)(5))
and Notice Item 2 (49 C. F. R. |I$ 195. 589(c) and 195. 575(c)) for failing to maintain records but
warned Respondent that it should take appropriate corrective action to correct these items.
Respondent presented information in its Response showing that it had taken action to address the
cited items.
' Item 2 was inadvertently cited as 49 Part 192 m the Notice.



Having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49 C. F. R. g 190. 205, that probable
violations of 49 C. F. R. )$ 195 404(c)(3) and 195. 402(d)(5) (Notice Item 1) and 49 C. F. R. $$
195. 589(c) and 195. 575(c) (Notice Item 2) have occurred and Respondent is hereby advised to
correct such conditions. In the event that PHMSA finds a violation for any of these items in a
subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to future enforcement action.
Under 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of
this Fmal Order. The petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent's receipt of this
Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The terms of the Order, including
any required corrective action remain in full effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon
request, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order shall be effective upon
receipt.
le z .
" 2008
Date Issued
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 10143