SFPP, LP — Safety Order

52021056NOPSO_Closure Letter_04022025_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: Joshua etzel@kindermorgan.com April 2, 2025 Mr. Joshua Etzel Chief Operating Officer Kinder Morgan Products Pipelines 1001 Louisiana Street, Suite 1000 Houston, Texas 77002 CPF 5-2021-056-NOPSO Case Closure Dear Mr. Etzel: On March 15, 2024, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued a Consent Order and Consent Agreement (Agreement) that required Kinder Morgan Inc. (KMI) to implement certain corrective measures to address the safety concerns with hazardous liquid segments in Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia. Based on a review of required submittals from KMI, PHMSA has determined that KMI has successfully completed the terms of the Consent Agreement and this case is now closed with no further enforcement action with respect to the matters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Dustin Hubbard Director, Western Region Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry PHP-500 D. Fehling (#21-210445) Zach Ragain Director – Engineering, Codes and Standards, KMI#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFMarch 15, 2024 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: wayne simmons@kindermorgan.com Wayne Simmons Chief Operating Officer, Products Pipelines Kinder Morgan, Inc. 1001 Louisiana Street, Suite 1000 Houston, Texas 77002 CPF No. 5-2021-056-NOPSO Dear Mr. Simmons: Enclosed please find a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement between the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Kinder Morgan, Inc., which was executed on March 4, 2024. Service of the Consent Order and Consent Agreement by electronic mail is deemed effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt, or as otherwise 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 Enclosures: Consent Order and Consent Agreement cc: Mr. Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA Mr. Zach Ragain, Director, Engineering, Codes and Standards, Kinder Morgan, Inc., zach_ragain@kindermorgan.com Ms. Annie Cook, Esq., Outside Counsel for Kinder Morgan, Inc., Bracewell LLP, annie.cook@bracewell.com Ms. Jessica Toll, Esq., Assistant General Counsel, Kinder Morgan, Inc., jessica_toll@kindermorgan.com CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUESTED#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_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 ) ) Kinder Morgan, Inc., ) CPF No. 5-2021-056-NOPSO ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) CONSENT ORDER By letter dated October 21, 2021, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS or Agency), issued a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice) to Kinder Morgan, Inc. (KMI or Respondent). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, the Notice alleged that conditions appear to exist on certain pipeline facilities operated by Respondent that pose pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property, or the environment. The Notice also proposed that Respondent take certain corrective measures to remedy the alleged conditions and ensure that the public, property, and the environment are protected from the potential risk. In response to the Notice, Respondent timely requested an informal consultation. During the informal consultation meetings from December 2021 to January 2024, the parties engaged in good-faith discussions that have resulted in the Consent Agreement attached to this Consent Order that settles all of the allegations in the Notice. Accordingly, the Consent Agreement is hereby approved and incorporated by reference into this Consent Order. The respondent is hereby ordered to comply with the terms of the Consent Agreement, effective immediately. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., failure to comply with this Consent Order may result in the assessment of civil penalties as set forth in 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.R.F. § 190.223, or in the referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States. The terms and conditions of this Consent Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.5. March 15, 2024 _____________________________ ______________________ Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 3U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, DC 20590 In the Matter of Kinder Morgan, Inc., Respondent. CPF No. 5-2021-056-NOPSO On October 21, 2021, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety, issued a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice) to Kinder Morgan, Inc. (KMI or Respondent). Following an internal audit of its liquid integrity management program, KMI voluntarily notified PHMSA on April 7, 2021, that it had discovered anomalies that were not evaluated and remediated within 180 days based on application of 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(H).1 PHMSA issued the Notice after it initiated an investigation of applicable hazardous liquid pipeline segments in Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia. At the time that KMI received the final relevant inline inspection (ILI) data, KMI did not consider these conditions to qualify as corrosion of or along a longitudinal seam weld that required excavation or repair within 180 days through application of its integrity management program (IMP). KMI submitted an integrity assurance notification to PHMSA and relevant certified state agencies on May 20, 2021, regarding up to 2,715 anomalies on certain products pipelines, which was subsequently updated in August 2021 to include an additional 581 anomalies.2 Since learning of the issue and in coordination with PHMSA, KMI has prioritized excavation and remediation of the applicable anomalies based on risk and has less than 5% anomalies remaining.3 Until it could complete relevant repairs, KMI also implemented pressure restrictions, aerial or ground right of way patrols, and/or continued implementation of its corrosion control program with remote monitoring and alert tracking of select locations and systems. The Notice alleged that the anomalies must be remediated and that they could worsen and impair the serviceability of the pipelines if left unaddressed or could develop on other areas. Specifically, CONSENT AGREEMENT 1E.g., PHMSA Interpretation issued to Plains Pipeline, PI-17-0014 (Apr. 26, 2018). 2 In an abundance of caution, KMI’s integrity assurance notifications were over inclusive as the anomalies reported by KMI and referenced in the Notice included some anomalies which Kinder Morgan had already evaluated and remediated. 3 Among the over 95% of completed anomaly repairs, KMI reports it has completed repair of all anomalies with metal loss depth greater than 40% with a Type B Sleeve or through pipe replacement.#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 4PHMSA alleged that the depth and length of the anomalies, combined with the known manufacturing processes of the seam type of the pipelines, pose a potential pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property, or the environment. The Notice proposed that Respondent take certain corrective measures to remedy the alleged conditions and ensure that the public, property, and the environment are protected from potential risk. On November 18, 2021, KMI responded to the Notice by timely submitting a request for an informal consultation. More than a dozen informal consultations were held virtually from December 14, 2021, to April 20, 2023. Through the course of informal consultation and in coordination with PHMSA, KMI excavated and remediated more than 95% of anomalies through installation of Type B sleeves or pipe replacement; among these repairs, KMI has completed repair of all anomalies with metal loss depth greater than 40%. With courtesy notifications to PHMSA and PHMSA’s express agreement, KMI has returned over 86% of the relevant pipeline segments to normal operating pressure and patrol frequencies once repairs were complete. As a result of informal consultations, PHMSA and KMI (collectively, the Parties) agreed that settlement of this proceeding will avoid further administrative proceedings or litigation and that entry into this Consent Agreement (Agreement) is the most appropriate means of resolving the issues raised in the Notice. Pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Part 190, without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and upon consent and agreement of the Parties, KMI and PHMSA hereby agree as follows. I. General Provisions 1. Respondent acknowledges that as the operator of hazardous liquid pipeline facilities in Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia, Respondent is subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations and administrative orders issued thereunder. For purposes of this Agreement, Respondent acknowledges that it received proper notice of PHMSA’s action in this proceeding and that the Notice states claims upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations and orders issued thereunder. 2. Except as set forth herein, this Agreement does not constitute a finding of violation of any Federal law or regulation and may not be used in any civil or administrative proceeding of any kind as evidence or proof of any fact, fault, or liability, or as evidence of the violation of any law, rule, regulation or requirement, except in a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or in future PHMSA enforcement actions. Respondent neither admits nor denies any allegation or conclusion in the Notice or this Agreement, but agrees, for purposes of this Agreement, to address the actions specified in Section III of this Agreement (Corrective Measures) and to abide by the terms of this Agreement. 3. After Respondent returns this signed Agreement to PHMSA, an agency representative will present it to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety recommending that the Associate Administrator adopt the terms of this Agreement by issuing an administrative order (Consent Order) incorporating the terms of this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement constitute an offer#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 5of settlement until accepted by the Associate Administrator. Once accepted, the Associate Administrator will issue a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Agreement. 4. Respondent consents to the issuance of the Consent Order that is consistent with this Agreement, and hereby waives any further procedural requirements with respect to its issuance. Respondent waives all rights to contest the adequacy of notice, or the validity of the Consent Order or this Agreement, including all rights to administrative or judicial hearings or appeals in this case, except as set forth herein. 5. This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon PHMSA, and upon Respondent, its officers, directors, and employees, and its successors, assigns, or other entities or persons otherwise bound by law. Respondent agrees to provide a copy of this Agreement and any incorporated work plans and schedules to all of Respondent's officers, employees, and agents whose duties might reasonably include compliance with this Agreement. 6. For all transfers of ownership or operating responsibility of KMI’s pipeline segments subject to this Agreement which occur while this Agreement is in effect, Respondent will provide a copy of this Agreement to the prospective transferee at least 30 days prior to such transfer. KMI will provide written notice of the transfer to the PHMSA Western Region Director (Director) no later than 60 days after the transfer occurs. Upon notice to PHMSA, the transferee will be responsible for compliance with the obligations in this Agreement, as the owner and operator of the relevant pipeline segments, instead of KMI. 7. This Agreement constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive agreement and understanding between the Parties with respect to the settlement embodied in this Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that there are no representations, agreements or understandings relating to settlement other than those expressly contained in this Agreement, except that the terms of this Agreement may be construed by reference to the Notice. 8. Nothing in this Agreement affects or relieves Respondent of its responsibility to comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations and orders issued thereunder. Nothing in this Agreement alters PHMSA's right of access, entry, inspection, and information gathering or PHMSA's authority to bring enforcement actions against Respondent pursuant to the Federal pipeline safety laws, the regulations and orders issued thereunder, or any other provision of Federal or State law. 9. This Agreement does not waive or modify any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations that are applicable to Respondent's pipeline systems. This Agreement is not a permit, or a modification of any permit, under any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations. Respondent remains responsible for achieving and maintaining compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations and permits. Respondent agrees that the activities to be performed pursuant to Section III may go beyond the minimum federal pipeline safety regulations. 10. This Agreement does not create rights in, or grant any cause of action to, any third party not party to this Agreement. The U.S. Department of Transportation is not liable for any injuries or damages to persons or property arising from acts or omissions of Respondent or its officers, employees, or agents carrying out the work required by this Agreement. Respondent agrees to#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 6hold harmless the U.S. Department of Transportation, its officers, employees, agents, and representatives from any and all causes of action arising from any acts or omissions of Respondent or its contractors in carrying out any work required by this Agreement. 11. Upon issuance of the Consent Order, the Parties agree to the following terms. II. Definitions 12. “Affected Anomalies” means seam weld metal loss anomalies subject to the Notice that have not been excavated and remediated as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, set forth in Appendix A. 13. The “Director” means the Director, Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety, Western Region. 14. “Effective Date” means the date the Consent Order is issued. 15. "Interim Safety Measures” means the temporary pressure restrictions, additional right of way patrols, and other mitigative measures previously agreed to by the parties set forth in Appendix B. III. Corrective Measures 16. Prioritization Schedule. KMI shall prioritize the Affected Anomalies for repair expeditiously based on location, completion of relevant permitting and approvals, and as crews are available. KMI must complete repair of Affected Anomalies on or before July 31, 2024, unless extended and/or KMI has applied for a special permit per Paragraph 20. 17. Repairs. Respondent must repair the Affected Anomalies in accordance with the approved remedial work plan described in Paragraph 19 with Type B Sleeves pursuant to ASME-B31.4- 2006 – Table 451.6.2(b)(1) or, alternatively, must replace the relevant pipe segment(s), unless addressed pursuant to Paragraph 20. 18. Interim Safety Measures. Respondent must maintain Interim Safety Measures, including temporary pressure restrictions where applicable, on pipeline segments set forth in Appendix B until such time that the Affected Anomalies are repaired pursuant to Paragraph 17 or PHMSA has granted a special permit pursuant to Paragraph 20 which Respondent is implementing. Once Respondent has remediated the Affected Anomalies pursuant to Paragraph 17 or is implementing a special permit pursuant to Paragraph 20 on the relevant pipeline segment(s) in Appendix B, KMI must notify the Director in writing to request that the Interim Safety Measures be lifted. 19. Work Plan. Respondent must implement the written remedial work plan that includes the corrective measures set forth in this Agreement in paragraphs 16, 17, 18, 21, and 23, and which has been previously approved by the Director. KMI must:#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 7A. Revise the remedial work plan as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities. Submit any such plan revisions in writing to the Director for prior approval. The Director may approve plan elements incrementally. The remedial work plan is incorporated into the Agreement. B. Implement the remedial work plan as approved by the Director, including any revisions to the plan. C. Make the results of the inspections, field excavations, and evaluations performed under the remedial work plan available to PHMSA or its representative upon request. 20. Special Permits. In lieu of repair under Paragraph 17, Respondent may submit a special permit application to address Affected Anomalies to PHMSA pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.341. Respondent must submit such special permit applications to PHMSA on or before March 31, 2024, and must respond to information requests made by PHMSA pursuant to such applications within 30 days of each request. The status of special permit applications filed by Respondent to address Affected Anomalies under this Agreement must be included in the quarterly reports (see Paragraph 24). For any special permit applications filed to address Affected Anomalies under this Agreement, Respondent agrees to cooperate fully in the special permit process per 49 C.F.R. § 190.341. If any special permit application under this Agreement is denied by PHMSA or withdrawn by Respondent, Respondent must repair the Affected Anomalies pursuant to Paragraph 17 within 180 days of the denial/withdrawal of the special permit request, as extended pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to Paragraphs 25, 31, 32, and 33. 21. Close Interval Surveys. KMI must conduct an “on and off” current Close Interval Survey (CIS) at a maximum 5-foot spacing along the entire length of each Affected Anomaly within 6 months of the Effective Date, as described below: A. KMI must evaluate each Affected Anomaly area in accordance with 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.571 and 195.573(a)(2), and accomplish the objectives of Paragraph 10.1.1.3 of NACE SP 0169. B. For inadequate cathodic protection (CP) level determination, KMI must conduct a CIS in both directions (a minimum of 1,000 feet) from the Affected Anomaly and until the CIS ends at test stations with adequate cathodic protection (CP) levels. C. KMI must remediate any findings within 12 months of completion of the CIS. D. A CIS will not be required where inadequate potentials are a result of an electrical short to an adjacent foreign structure, a rectifier malfunction, an interruption of power source, or an interruption of CP current. KMI must document and repair these instances.#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 822. Guidance Materials Review. Respondent will use its Monthly Regulatory Verification tool and process to track PHMSA pipeline safety guidance materials published in the Federal Register, including frequently asked questions, advisory bulletins, and other guidance documents. Respondent must prepare a written report summarizing its process and send it to the Director within 90 days of the Effective Date. 23. Historical Records Review. During implementation of the remedial work plan, Respondent will compare and validate findings in the field per § 195.452(g)(1)(i-ii) with pipeline records and update those records as needed where they conflict with field findings with respect to material records, pressure test records, diameter, wall thickness, seam type, and coating type. Where pipe specified minimum yield strength is unknown, Respondent will validate yield strength through destructive or non-destructive testing. Respondent will utilize destructive testing as the validation method when pipe is removed and replaced, and non-destructive testing when repair is completed with a Type B Sleeve. Non-destructive testing will be performed based on availability of crews and equipment pursuant to the spacing requirements of 192.607(c)-(e). Destructive testing will be performed with tensile testing. 24. Quarterly Reports. Respondent will submit quarterly reports to the Director that: (1) include results of the testing required by this Agreement; and (2) describe the progress of the repairs and other remedial actions being undertaken as required by this Agreement. The first report will be due 45 days from the Effective Date. 25. Extensions of Time. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance with any of the terms of the Agreement upon a written request timely submitted demonstrating good cause for an extension. The Director shall respond in writing to any such request. 26. Appeals. Respondent may appeal any decision of the Director to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. Decisions of the Associate Administrator will be final. IV. Review and Approval Process 27. With respect to any submission under Section III (Corrective Measures) of this Agreement that requires the approval of the Director, the Director may: (a) approve, in whole or in part, the submission, (b) approve the submission on specified, reasonable conditions, (c) disapprove, in whole or in part, the submission, or (d) any combination of the foregoing. If the Director approves, approves in part, or approves with conditions, KMI will take all action as approved by the Director, subject to Respondent's right to invoke the dispute resolution procedures in Section V with respect to any conditions the Director identifies. If the Director disapproves all or any portion of the submission, the Director will provide KMI with a written notice of the deficiencies. Respondent will correct all deficiencies within a reasonable time specified by the Director and resubmit it for approval. V. Dispute Resolution 28. The Director and KMI will informally attempt to resolve any disputes arising under this Agreement. If Respondent and the Director are unable to informally resolve the dispute within 15#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 9calendar days of submittal of Respondent's invoking dispute resolution, KMI may request in writing, within 10 days thereafter, a written determination resolving the dispute from the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety providing all information that Respondent believes is relevant to the dispute. If the request is submitted as provided herein, the Associate Administrator will issue a final determination in writing, which constitutes final Agency action. The existence of a dispute and PHMSA's consideration of matters placed in dispute will not excuse, toll, or suspend any term or timeframe for completion of any work to be performed under this Agreement during the pendency of the dispute resolution process, except as agreed by the Director or the Associate Administrator in writing. VI. Enforcement 29. This Agreement, as adopted by the Consent Order, is subject to all enforcement authorities available to the PHMSA under 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and 49 C.F.R. Part 190. All procedures set forth or referenced in Section III will be automatically incorporated into this Agreement and are enforceable in the same manner. VII. Recordkeeping and Information Disclosure 30. Unless otherwise required in this Agreement, KMI agrees to maintain records demonstrating compliance with all requirements of this Agreement for a period of at least 5 years following completion of all work to be performed. For any reports, plans, or other deliverables required to be submitted to PHMSA pursuant to this Agreement, KMI may assert a claim of business confidentiality or other protections applicable to the release of information by PHMSA, covering part or all of the information required to be submitted to PHMSA pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 7. KMI must mark the claim of confidentiality in writing on each page and include a statement specifying the grounds for each claim of confidentially. PHMSA will determine the release of any information submitted pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 7, the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, DOT and PHMSA policies, and other applicable regulations and Executive Orders. VIII. Force Majeure 31. Respondent agrees to perform the terms of this Agreement within the timeframes established under the remedial work plan, including pursuant to extensions under Paragraph 25 or modifications under Paragraph 34, unless performance is delayed by a force majeure. For purposes of this Agreement, a force majeure is defined as an event arising from causes beyond the control of the Respondent, or any entity controlled by Respondent or Respondent’s contractors, which delays or prevents performance of any obligation under the Agreement despite Respondent’s commercially reasonable efforts to fulfill the obligation. 32. If a force majeure event occurs or has occurred that may delay the performance of a term of this Agreement beyond the approved timeframe, Respondent shall notify the Director in writing, within 5 business days of when Respondent knew that the event might cause a delay. Such notice shall identify the cause of the delay or anticipated delay and the anticipated duration of the delay; state the measures taken or to be taken to prevent or minimize the delay; and estimate the timetable#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 10for implementation of those measures. Failure to comply with the notice provision of this paragraph and to undertake reasonable efforts to avoid and minimize the delay shall waive a claim of force majeure by Respondent. 33. If the Director determines, upon notification by Respondent, that a delay or anticipated delay in performance is or was attributable to a force majeure, then the Director will extend the time period for the performance of that term for a reasonable period. The Director will notify Respondent, in writing, of the length of any extension of performance of such terms affected by the force majeure. Any such extensions shall not alter Respondent’s obligation to perform or complete other terms of this Agreement which are not affected by the force majeure. IX. Modification 34. The terms of this Agreement may be modified by mutual agreement of the Parties. Such modifications must be in writing and signed by both parties. X. Termination 35. This Agreement will terminate upon submission, approval where specified, and completion of the deliverables set forth in Section III. Specifically, once Respondent has completed the repair or replacement pursuant to Paragraph 17 or obtained a special permit pursuant to Paragraph 20 for the Applicable Anomalies and completed the obligations in Section III, this Agreement will terminate. Nothing in this Agreement prevents KMI from completing any of the obligations earlier than the deadlines provided for in this Agreement. XI. Ratification 36. The Parties' undersigned representatives certify that they are fully authorized to enter into the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to execute and legally bind such party to this document. 37. The Parties hereby agree to all conditions and terms of this Agreement.#

52021056NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_03152024_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 11For Respondent: _________________________________________ Wayne G. Simmons Chief Operating Officer – Product Pipelines Kinder Morgan, Inc. Date: _________________________ For PHMSA: _________________________________________ Dustin Hubbard Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety Date: _________________________#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFVIA E-MAIL TO MR. WAYNE SIMMONS October 21, 2021 Mr. Wayne Simmons Chief Operating Officer Kinder Morgan, Inc. 1001 Louisiana Street, Suite 1000 Houston, Texas 77002 CPF 5-2021-056-NOPSO Dear Mr. Simmons: Enclosed is a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice) issued in the above-referenced case. The Notice proposes that you take certain measures with respect to your various hazardous liquid pipeline assets in Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia to ensure pipeline safety.1 Your options for responding are set forth in the Notice. Your receipt of the Notice constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5. PHMSA appreciates the company’s initial disclosure and the cooperation to date regarding measures taken and we look forward to a successful resolution to ensure pipeline safety. Please direct any questions on this matter to me at 720-963-3160. Sincerely, Dustin Hubbard Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Enclosure: Notice of Proposed Safety Order 1 The OPIDs for these assets are: 2190 (Central Florida Pipeline Corp.); 4472 (Cypress Interstate Pipeline LLC); 15674 (Products (SE) Pipe Line Corp.); 18092 (Santa Fe Pacific Pipeline Partners, LP); 26125 (CALNEV); 39518 (Kinder Morgan Utopia, LLC); and 31957 (Kinder Morgan Wink Pipeline LLC).#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 2DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WESTERN REGION LAKEWOOD, CO 80228 ____________________________________ ) In the Matter of ) ) Kinder Morgan, Inc., ) CPF No. 5-2021-056-NOPSO ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) NOTICE OF PROPOSED SAFETY ORDER Background and Purpose Pursuant to Chapter 601 of title 49, United States Code, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has initiated an on-site inspection and information review of the safety of Kinder Morgan Inc.’s (KMI) hazardous liquid pipeline assets located in Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia to ensure pipeline safety. As a result of the inspection and information review, it appears that a condition or conditions exist on your pipeline facilities that pose a pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property or the environment. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117(m), PHMSA issues this Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice), notifying you of the preliminary findings of the investigation, and proposing that you take measures to ensure that the public, property, and the environment are protected from the potential risk. Preliminary Findings • The following operators are subject to the terms and conditions of this Notice:2 1. OPID 2190: Central Florida Pipeline Corp. 2. OPID 4472: Cypress Interstate Pipeline LLC 3. OPID 15674: Products (SE) Pipe Line Corporation 4. OPID 18092: SFPP, LP 5. OPID 26125: CALNEV Pipeline Co. 6. OPID 39518: Kinder Morgan Utopia, LLC 7. OPID 31957: Kinder Morgan Wink Pipeline LLC 2 All of these operators are subsidiaries of Kinder Morgan, Inc.#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 32 • In November 2020, KMI conducted an audit of its liquid integrity management program, and discovered that it missed the time period to remediate approximately 2,700 anomalies occurring on or along the longitudinal seam welds across various liquid pipeline assets traversing high consequence areas (HCAs) or HCA could-affect areas in numerous states.3 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h) requires operators to take prompt action to address all anomalous conditions in the pipeline that the operator discovers through the integrity assessment or information analysis, and prescribes timelines for scheduling and repairing certain conditions.4 Although KMI’s in-line inspection reports identify these anomalies as 180-day conditions pursuant to § 195.452(h)(4)(iii), it is unclear at this time if all these anomalies qualify as 180-day conditions, or if some anomalies may in fact be 60-day or immediate repair conditions based on future confirmation digs. • On April 7, 2021, KMI notified PHMSA of the unremediated anomalies and explained the steps it was taking to gather additional information to complete its internal review. Since that time, PHMSA has requested additional information from the company, including, for example, the sizes and locations of each unremediated anomaly, and various information on the physical attributes of each affected pipeline segment. This information is contained in two spreadsheets provided by KMI, dated August 4, 2021 and August 27, 2021, and is attached at Exhibit 1. • On May 20, 2021, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(1)(i), KMI notified PHMSA that it was unable to complete the remediation of approximately 2,715 anomalies that qualified as 180-day repair conditions on certain products pipelines within the schedule under 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(H). KMI reported that it was in the process of prioritizing repairs for remediation and conducting certain repairs in 2021. KMI also reported to PHMSA that it had implemented weekly aerial right-of-way patrols and continued implementation of its corrosion control program, including remote monitoring and alert tracking of select locations and systems. • In a June 16, 2021 and August 13, 2021 meeting with KMI, PHMSA was informed that KMI had instituted 20% pressure restrictions for the majority of the impacted pipelines. KMI explained that for a small number of pipeline segments, it was determined that 20% pressure reductions would not provide a safety benefit or a material margin of safety and would otherwise have a detrimental impact on key geographical areas (including critical 3 This included anomalies located on intrastate assets operated by: (1) Kinder Morgan Crude and Condensate LLC; and (2) Double Eagle Pipeline LLC. These assets are not subject to the safety oversight of PHMSA and are regulated by the Texas Railroad Commission. 4 See, e.g., 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(E) (requiring operators to schedule evaluation and remediation of an area of general corrosion with a predicted metal loss greater than 50% of nominal wall within 180 days of discovery of the qualifying condition); see also 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(F) (requiring operators to schedule evaluation and remediation of predicted metal loss greater than 50% of nominal wall that is located at a crossing of another pipeline, or is in an area with widespread circumferential corrosion, or is in an area that could affect a girth weld within 180 days of discovery of the qualifying condition); see also 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(H) (requiring operators to schedule evaluation and remediation of corrosion of or along a longitudinal seam weld within 180 days of discovery of the qualifying condition).#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 43 resources in the communities served). In those instances, KMI conducted twice-weekly aerial or ground patrols (weather permitting) and/or a 10% pressure reduction. • On August 17, 2021, KMI notified PHMSA that it made repairs on one pipeline segment (the Cypress Mont Belvieu to Spindletop interstate pipeline segment) and had identified an additional interstate pipeline in Texas with unremediated anomalies (Kinder Morgan Wink Pipeline LLC). • As of the date of this Notice, there are now approximately 3,261 unremediated anomalies. KMI has reported to PHMSA that it has repaired approximately 12% of the reported anomalies. • The pipe characteristics of each impacted segment are noted below, organized by OPID: Central Florida Pipeline Coppe Segment Age Diameter Wall (yrs) (SMYS) Grade Thickness Seam Type Coating (inch) MOP/Design Pressure (psig) (inch) ITE 48 8.625 (psig) 35000 0.250 Other (ERW-HF/ Coal Tar 285/1461 10" 49 10.75 60000 0.203 DSAW) Other (ERW-HF/ Xtru 1423/1632 mainline 10" 49 10.75 60000 0.279 DSAW) mainline Other (ERW-HF/ Xtru 1423/2242 10" 49 10.75 60000 DSAW) mainline 0.188 Other (ERW-HF/ Xtru 1423/1511 mainline 16" 24 16 52000 0.312 DSAW) Other (ERW-HF/ Coal Tar 1440/1460 16" 24 46000 DSAW) 0.500 Other (ERW-HF/ Coal Tar 1440/2070 mainline 16" 17 16 DSAW) 56000 mainline 0.375 Other (ERW-HF/ Coal Tar 17 42000 DSAW) 1440/1890 16" mainline 0.406 Other (ERW-HF/ FBE 1440/1535 16" 17 16 70000 DSAW) 0.469 Other (ERW-HF/| FBE 1440/2955 mainline 6 52000 DSAW) mainline 16" 0.312 DSAW) Other (ERW-HF/ FBE 1440/1460 Cypress Interstate Pipeline LLC: Segment Age (yrs) Diameter Pipe Grade Wall (inch) Thickness Seam Type Coating MOP/Design Pressure (psig) Cypress 30 8.625 (psig) 60000 (inch) 0.219 Other (ERW- HF/ DSAW) FBE 2160/2194#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 54 Products (SE) Pipe Line Corp.: Segment Age Diameter Pipe Grade Wall Seam Type Coating MOP/Design (yrs) (inch) (SMYS) Thickness Pressure (psig) 12"-14W (psig) (inch) 16 12.75 52000 0.203 Other (ERW- Coal Tar 1087/1192 12"-14W HF/ DSAW) 57 12.75 12"-14W 57 52000 52000 0.203 0.203 ERW-LF Coal Tar 1087/1192 12"-14W 12.75 ERW-LF Coal Tar 1106/1192 57 12.75 52000 0.203 ERW-LF Coal Tar Coal Tar 1096/1192 12"-14W 57 12.75 52000 0.203 ERW-LF 1146/1192 14"-14W 57 14 52000 0.219 ERW-LF Coal Tar 14"-14W 14"-14W 57 14 52000 1027/1171 52000 0.219 57 57 14 0.219 ERW-LF Asphaltic Coal Tar 1027/1171 14"-14W 14 52000 0.219 ERW-LF 1098/1171 ERW-LF Coal Tar 1099/1171 DS1 80 80 12.75 12.75 35000 35000 0.375 ERW-LF ERW-LF Coal Tar 720/1482 DS1 0.375 Somastic 720/1482 DS2 80 80 12.75 35000 35000 0.375 DS2 12.75 0.375 ERW-LF ERW-LF Somastic Coal Tar 720/1482 720/1482 DS3 80 12.75 35000 0.375 ERW-LF Coal Tar 720/1482 DS3 80 12.75 35000 0.375 ERW-LE Somastic 720/1482 DS4 80 12.75 35000 0.375 ERW-LF Coal Tar 720/1482 DS4 80 12.75 35000 35000 0.375 ERW-LF Somastic 720/1482 MDA1 80 12.75 0.375 ERW-LF Coal Tar 1181/1482 MDA2 49 12.75 35000 0.375 Other (ERW- Coal Tar 1243/1482 8CO 54 8.625 HF/ DSAW) 52000 0.188 Other (ERW- Coal Tar 1632/1632 8CO 50 8.625 52000 0.188 Other (ERW- HF/ DSAW) Coal Tar 1632/1632 8MC 52 8.625 52000 0.188 HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW- Coal Tar 1632/1632 8RK1 45 8.625 42000 0.250 HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW- Coal Tar 1526/1753 10BMG 50 10.75 HF/ DSAW) 46000 0.250 Other (ERW- Coal Tar 1440/1540 HF/ DSAW) SFPP, LP: Segment Age Diameter Pipe Wall Seam (inch) Grade Thickness Type Coating MOP/Design (yrs) Pressure (psig) (SMYS) 8.625 46000 (psig) (inch) LS-14 59 0.188 ERW-LF 8.625 46000 0.219 Epoxy 1440/1444 LS-14 59 ERW-LF Polytape 1440/1682 LS-14 8.625 46000 0.219 ERW-LF Polytape 1440/1444 LS-14 59 8.625 58 8.625 46000 46000 0.219 ERW-LF LS-14 Dblco/Dwrap 1440/1682 0.188 ERW-LF Polytape 1314/1444 LS-14 58 8.625 46000 0.219 ERW-LF LS-14 42 8.625 46000 0.188 ERW-LF 1440/1444 1314/1536 IS 66 16 42000 0.250 ERW-LF 2 Part Epoxy 10/125/ 720/945#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 6126 LS 10/125/ 126 LS 111/112/ 113 LS‐114 LS‐114 LS‐114 LS‐114 LS‐114 LS‐114 LS‐114 LS‐120/1 LS‐120/1 LS‐122 LS‐123 LS‐130C LS‐130C 66 22 36 32 32 32 32 32 23 66 22 58 58 17 17 16 20_22 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 16_20 16_20 10.75 10.75 20 20 42000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 42000 42000 52000 52000 60000 60000 0.250 0.312 0.344 0.281 0.281 0.312 0.344 0.375 0.344 0.250 0.250 0.219 0.219 0.375 0.375 ERW‐LF Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) ERW‐LF Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) ERW‐LF ERW‐LF Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) 5 Mastic FBE Polytape FBE Polytape FBE FBE FBE FBE Mastic Polytape 720/945 1440/1348 1440/1486 1440/1214 1440/1214 1440/1348 1440/1486 1440/1620 1440/1486 945/945 945/945 Coal Tar Polytape Poly‐ethylene Paint 720/1525 580/1525 1440/1620 14400/1620#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 7LS‐130C LS‐16 LS‐16 LS‐16 LS‐16 LS‐16 LS‐16 LS‐17/18 LS‐37 LS‐46/41 LS‐46/41 LS‐52 LS‐52 LS‐52 LS‐52 LS‐54 LS‐55 LS‐55 LS‐58 LS‐58 LS‐58 LS‐58 LS‐61 17 56 56 56 56 33 33 57 52 58 58 65 65 65 65 65 64 64 63 63 63 63 59 20 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75 12.75 12.75 8.625 8.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 6.625 60000 52000 52000 52000 52000 52000 52000 52000 52000 46000 46000 42000 42000 42000 42000 42000 46000 46000 42000 42000 42000 42000 42000 0.500 0.188 0.188 0.188 0.219 0.188 0.188 0.188 0.219 0.188 0.188 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.250 0.250 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW‐ HF/ DSAW) ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF ERW‐LF 6 Poly‐ethylene 1440/2160 Epoxy 1309/1310 Somastic 1309/1310 Polytape 1309/1310 Somastic 1309/1525 Poly‐ ethylene 1309/1310 Somastic 1309/1310 Dblco/ Dwrap Coal Tar 1104/1104 1286/1286 Dblco/ Dwrap Polytape Coal Tar 2 Part Epoxy Asphaltic Polytape Asphaltic Asphaltic Unknown Asphaltic 2 Part Epoxy Polytape Unknown Asphaltic 1440/1444 1440/1444 584/1999 584/1999 584/1999 584/1999 252/1999 1440/2500 1440/2500 833/1999 833/1999 833/1999 833/1999 740/1999#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 87 LS-62 58 8.625 LS-64 59 8.625 46000 46000 0.188 ERW-LF ERW-LF Asphaltic Asphaltic 1440/1444 0.188 834/1444 LS-64 LS-64 59 8.625 8.625 46000 46000 0.188 ERW-LE Polytape 834/1444 0.188 ERW-LE Somastic 834/1444 LS-64 59 8.625 46000 LS-72 59 8.625 46000 0.250 ERW-LF Asphaltic ERW-LF Somastic 834/1920 LS-72 59 8.625 46000 0.250 ERW-LF 1440/1920 0.250 Asphaltic LS-72 59 8.625 46000 1440/1920 46000 0.188 ERW-LF ERW-LF Polytape 1440/1444 LS-72 8.625 46000 0.188 LS-72 Somastic 1440/1444 59 8.625 0.188 ERW-LF 2 Part 1440/1444 LS-8 63 8.625 46000 ERW-LF Epoxy LS-8 63 8.625 46000 0.250 0.250 ERW-LF Asphaltic 2 Part 1440/1920 1440/1920 63 ERW-LF Coal Tar Epoxy 64 ERW-LF 1440/2249 1440/1920 64 ERW-LF ERW-LE Polytape Somastic Asphaltic 1440/1540 1440/1540 64 52 Other Coal Tar 1158/1525 (ERW- HF/ DSAW) CALNEV Pipeline Co.: Segment Age Diameter TPipe Wall Seam Type Coating MOP/Design (yrs) (inch) (SMYS) Grade Thickness Pressure (psig) (inch) Calnev 41 6.625 35000 (psig) 0.172 Other Polytape (ERW-HF/ 748/1308 Calnev 6.625 35000 0.172 DSAW) Other Poly- 748/1308 (ERW-HF/ DSAW) ethylene Calnev 41 6.625 35000 0.172 (ERW-HF/ Other 2 Part 748/1308 Epoxy Calnev- 19 12.75 52000 DSAW) 0.250 Other Poly- ML5A (ERW-HF/ ethylene 1500/1468 DSAW) ML Calnev- 48 14 52000 0.281 Other Polytape 1580/1503 (ERW-HF/ Calnev- 61 8.625 42000 0.219 ERW-LF DSAW) Coal Tar 666/1536 ML1 Calnev- 61 ML1 8.625 42000 0.219 ERW-LF Coal Tar 851/1536 ML1 Calnev- 61 8.625 42000 0.219 ERW-LF Coal Tar 1189/1536 ML1 Calnev- 61 8.625 42000 0.219 ERW-LF Coal Tar 1500/1536#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 98 Calnev- 61 8.625 42000 0.219 ERW-LE Paint 851/1536 ML1 ML1 Calnev- 61 8.625 42000 0.250 ERW-LF Polytape 1189/1753 Kinder Morgan Utopia LLC: Segment Age (yrs) (inch) Diameter Pipe Grade Wall Seam Type Coating MOP/Design (SMYS) Thickness Pressure (psig) 44 (psig) (inch) Utopia 12.75 60000 0.213 Other (ERW - Poly- HF/ DSAW) 1000/1443 Utopia 44 12.75 60000 ethylene 0.275 HF/ DSAW) Other (ERW- Poly- ethylene 1000/1864 Utopia 44 12.75 60000 0.306 Other (ERW- Poly- 1000/2074 Utopia 44 12.75 52000 0.383 Other (ERW - HF/ DSAW) ethylene Poly- 1000/2249 HF/ DSAW) ethylene Kinder Morgan Wink Pipeline, LLC: Segment Age | Diameter (inch) Pipe Grade Wall Thickness Seam Type Coating MOP/Design (yrs) (SMYS) Pressure (psig) (psig) Wink- 68 10.75 0.219 (inch) 52000 LF or DC Unknown 1404/1525 L301 CO2- ERW Wink- 68 10.75 42000 0.250 LF or DC Coal Tar 1404/1407 L301 CO2- ERW Wink- 68 10.75 42000 0.250 LF or DC 2 Part 1404/1407 1301 COZ- ERW Epoxy Wink- 68 10.75 42000 0.250 LF or DC Unknown 1404/1407 L301 C02- ERW Wink- CO2- 68 10.75 42000 0.279 LF or DC Unknown 1404/1570 ERW L301 Wink- 66 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC ERW ethylene Poly- 717/936 L304 CO2- Wink- 66 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC 2 Part 717/936 CO2- L304 ERW Epoxy Wink- 64 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC ERW ethylene Poly- 700/936 L304 CO2- Wink- 64 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC 2 Part 700/936 CO2- L304 ERW Epoxy#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 109 Wink- 64 20 52000 | 0.250 LF or DC 2 Part 711/936 L304 CO2- ERW Epoxy Wink- 64 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC CO2- ERW ethylene Poly- 717/936 L304 Wink- 28 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC L304 CO2- ERW Poly- 717/936 ethylene Wink- 1304 CO2- 28 20 52000 0.250 LF or DC 2 Part 717/936 ERW Epoxy • The products transported are noted below: Operator Product Central Florida Pipeline Corp. Gasoline, Diesel, Jet Cypress Interstate Pipeline LLC NGL Products (SE) Pipe Line Corp. Gasoline, Diesel, Jet, Kerosene SFPP, LP Gasoline, Diesel, Jet CALNEV Pipeline Co. Gasoline, Diesel, Jet Kinder Morgan Utopia, LLC Ethane Kinder Morgan Wink Pipeline, LLC Crude The general geographical areas in which each pipeline is located are noted below: Operator Impacted Geographical Conditions States Central Florida Pipeline Corp. Florida Gulf Coast - Sandy Cypress Interstate Pipeline LLC Louisiana, Gulf Coast - Sand - Clay Texas Products (SE) Pipe Line Corp. Alabama, Gulf Coast - East Coast Georgia, (DC area Louisiana, Marsh - Clay - Rocky Mississippi, North Carolina, Virginia SFPP, LP Arizona, Sandy - Silt - Loam - Clay Calitornia, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas CALNEV Pipeline Co. California, Sandy Nevada Kinder Morgan Utopia, LLC Michigan | Loam - Clay#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1110 Ohio5 Kinder Morgan Wink Pipeline LLC Texas Sandy -Sandy Loam • Each pipeline traverses high consequence areas (HCAs) or HCA could-affect areas, as defined in § 195.450 and/or unusually sensitive areas (USAs), as defined in § 195.6. For a map of each OPID, please see Exhibit 2. • On October 27, 2009 the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued several safety recommendations after concluding that current inspection and testing programs are not sufficiently reliable to identify features associated with longitudinal seam failures of electric resistance welded (ERW) pipe prior to catastrophic failure in operating pipelines.6 In P-09-01 and P-09-02, the NTSB recommended that PHMSA conduct a comprehensive study to identify actions that can be implemented by pipeline operators to eliminate catastrophic longitudinal seam failures in ERW pipe, and implement the actions needed. In response to P-09-01, on October 23, 2013, a report was published entitled Final Summary Report and Recommendations for the Comprehensive Study to Understand Longitudinal ERW Seam Failures-Phase One. 7 It evaluated the effectiveness of hydrotesting and first-generation inspection technologies by trending historical results that compared and contrasted the actual versus detected anomalies, with the results showing that some technology gaps remained to be addressed. In response to P-09-02, PHMSA worked to improve hydrotesting protocols of ERW/FW seams, enhance defect characterization, detection, and sizing via inspection, develop and refine predictive models and quantify growth mechanisms, and develop management tools, including software, protocols and training. Finally, PHMSA held a special information session, Comprehensive Study to Understand Longitudinal ERW Seam Failures, as a part of the Pipeline R&D Forum on November 16-17, 2016. In addition, PHMSA issued several Advisory Bulletins (previously referred to as “Alert Notices”) concerning Electric Resistance Weld (ERW) pipe manufactured prior to 1970. In Alert Notice (ALN) 88-01, PHMSA advised operators to take certain actions to mitigate the risk of failure on pre-1970 ERW pipe by carefully reviewing their leak, failure, and test history as well as their corrosion control records to ensure that adequate cathodic protection (CP) has been and is now being provided.8 In areas where CP has been deficient for a period or periods of time, the operators should conduct an 5 As of the date of this Notice, KMI has not reported any anomalies on segments located in Ohio. 6 See generally NTSB Safety Recommendations website, available at https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety- recs/Pages/safety-recommendations.aspx (last accessed Sept. 21, 2021). 7 Available at https://www.aga.org/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/media/phmsa final summary erw seam failures 1.pdf (last accessed Sept. 21, 2021). 8 Pipeline Safety Alert Notice, ALN-88-01 (Jan. 28, 1988) (on file with PHMSA).#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1211 examination of the condition of the pipeline, including close interval pipe-to-soil corrosion surveys, selective visual examination of the pipe coating, and/or other appropriate means of physically determining the effects of the environment on the pipe seam. If an unsatisfactory condition is found, or if a pre-1970 ERW pipeline has not been hydrostatically tested to 125% of the maximum allowable pressure, operators should consider hydrostatic testing to assure the integrity of the pipeline. In 1989, PHMSA published ALN-89-01 due to the continuing failure of ERW seams. PHMSA recommended operators take additional actions, including (1) consideration of hydrostatic testing on all hazardous liquid pipelines that have not been hydrostatically tested to 125% of the maximum allowable pressure, or alternatively reducing the operating pressure 20%; (2) avoiding increasing a pipeline’s long-standing operating pressure; (3) assuring the effectiveness of CP, and considering the use of close interval pipe-to-soil surveys after evaluating the pipe coating and corrosion/cathodic protection history; and (4) in the event of an ERW seam failure, conduct metallurgical examinations in order to determine the probable condition of the remainder of the ERW seams in the pipeline.9 On January 4, 2011, after the San Bruno incident, PHMSA published Advisory Bulletin (ADB) 11-01 stressing the importance of implementing robust integrity management (IM) programs for aging pipelines.10 PHMSA expressed concern that some operators are not sufficiently aware of their pipeline attributes nor are they adequately or consistently assessing threats and risks as a part of their IM programs. “In particular, operators’ programs fail to adequately address stress corrosion cracking, seam failure, or internal corrosion in their threat identification and risk assessments.” (emphasis added.) • Most of KMI’s identified anomalies are located on LF-ERW pipe. Pipelines with LF-ERW are generally older pipelines with weld seam integrity issues due to the manufacturing process, aging coatings that can have coating disbondment, shielding of cathodic protection, and cathodic protection levels at less than 49 C.F.R. § 195.571 requirements. Further, some of these lines have not had an in-line inspection conducted within the requisite five-year interval under § 195.452(j)(3), and may not have had a pressure test. Any flaw, such as corrosion or cracking, would impair the serviceability or integrity of the weld seam and pipe body leading to an increased threat of failure. • There are thousands of unremediated anomalies on hundreds of miles of Kinder Morgan hazardous liquid pipeline across the United States. These anomalies must be remediated to ensure the safety of the pipelines. The anomalies could worsen and impair the serviceability of the pipelines if left unaddressed or could develop on other areas. The depth and length of these anomalies, combined with a seam type that has known integrity risks including toughness of the pipe body, seam, and heat-affected zone, create a 9 Pipeline Safety Alert Notice, ALN-89-01 (Mar. 8, 1989) (on file with PHMSA). 10 Pipeline Safety Advisory Bulletin, ADB-11-01 (Jan. 4, 2011) available at https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/federal-register-documents/2011-208 (last accessed Sept. 21, 2021).#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1312 significant integrity threat, placing the pipelines at heightened risk of failure, threatening harm to people and the environment. • The spill histories for these pipelines are located at Exhibit 3. Proposed Issuance of Safety Order Section 60117(m) of Title 49, United States Code, provides for the issuance of a safety order, after reasonable notice and the opportunity for a hearing, requiring corrective measures, which may include physical inspection, testing, repair, or other action, as appropriate. The basis for making the determination that a pipeline facility has a condition or conditions that pose a pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property, or the environment is set forth both in the above-referenced statute and 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, a copy of which is enclosed. After evaluating the foregoing preliminary findings of fact and considering the age of the pipes involved, the manufacturing process, the hazardous nature of the products transported and the pressure required for transporting such products, the characteristics of the geographical areas where the pipeline facilities are located, and the likelihood that the conditions could worsen or develop on other areas of the pipelines and potentially impact their serviceability, it appears that the continued operation of the affected pipelines without corrective measures would pose a pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property, or the environment. Accordingly, PHMSA issues this Notice of Proposed Safety Order to notify Respondent of the proposed issuance of a safety order and to propose that Respondent take measures specified herein to address the potential risk. Response to this Notice In accordance with § 190.239, you have 30 days following receipt of this Notice to submit a written response to the official who issued the Notice. If you do not respond within 30 days, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest this Notice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Safety Order. In your response, you may notify that official that you intend to comply with the terms of the Notice as proposed, or you may request that an informal consultation be scheduled (you will also have the opportunity to request an administrative hearing before a safety order is issued). Informal consultation provides you with the opportunity to explain the circumstances associated with the risk condition(s) alleged in the notice and, as appropriate, to present a proposal for a work plan or other remedial measures, without prejudice to your position in any subsequent hearing. If you and PHMSA agree within 30 days of informal consultation on a plan and schedule for you to address each identified risk condition, we may enter into a written consent agreement (PHMSA would then issue an administrative consent order incorporating the terms of the agreement). If a consent agreement is not reached, or if you have elected not to request informal consultation, you may request an administrative hearing in writing within 30 days following receipt of the Notice or within 10 days following the conclusion of an informal consultation that did not result in a consent agreement, as applicable. Following a hearing, if the Associate Administrator finds the facility to have a condition that#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1413 poses a pipeline integrity risk to the public, property, or the environment in accordance with § 190.239, the Associate Administrator may issue a Safety Order. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). In your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 5-2021-056-NOPSO and for each document you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible. Proposed Corrective Measures Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117(m) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, PHMSA proposes to issue to KMI a safety order incorporating the following remedial requirements with respect to the affected pipelines: 1. Prioritization Schedule. In carrying out the corrective measures in this order, KMI must implement the prioritization schedule for each OPID located at Exhibit 4. In prioritizing anomalies for remediation, PHMSA utilized the metrics in Table 1 below: Table I Priority (ordered highest to lowest) Metal Loss 1 ≥ 40 wall loss 2 < 40% to 30% wall loss 3 < 30% to 20% wall loss ≤ 20 to 15% wall loss and length over 2 inches 5 All others At the time of issuance of this Notice, PHMSA does not know the safe pressures for the impacted pipelines. Therefore, KMI must calculate the Failure Pressure Ratio (FPR) for each anomaly in Priority Rankings 2-5 in Exhibit 4, and if necessary, elevate the anomaly to a higher priority ranking based on Table II below. In calculating safe pressures, KMI must use documented material strength and toughness values or must test for material strength pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 192.607 and for toughness properties pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 192.712(e)(2)(1)(C)&(D) and use American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 579, CorLAS or PipeAssess for crack evaluation based upon weld seam metal loss for LF-ERW, EFW, DC-ERW, etc. Table II Priority (ordered highest to lowest) | Failure Pressure Ratio (FPR) - ≤ 1.25 times Max. Operating Pressure (MOP) 2 > 1.25 to 1.39 times MOP 3 >1.39 times MOP#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1514 2. 3. 4. Evaluations. KMI must conduct evaluations of the identified anomalies as follows: A. KMI must evaluate all seam anomalies in accordance with API RP 579 and the requirements set forth in 49 C.F.R. §192.712(d)-(g), and evaluate corrosion as a crack in the weld seam. KMI must use Phased Array Ultrasonic Testing (PAUT) to evaluate all anomalies. If PAUT is unavailable and KMI elects to use shear wave, it must demonstrate that shear wave will give equal or better identification of seam and heat-affected zone cracks. KMI can use R-STRENG or ASME/ANSI B31G outside weld seam and heat-affected zone to evaluate corrosion anomalies. B. If an anomaly is located in cased pipe areas that are shorted, KMI must notify PHMSA in writing, and comply with the requirements set forth in 49 C.F.R. § 195.575 and this Order. C. If KMI does not already have a written procedure to complete the evaluations noted above, then KMI must develop a written procedure, and must document the results of each evaluation. Repairs. KMI must repair all pipe seam anomalies with Type B Sleeves pursuant to ASME-B31.4-2006 – Table 451.6.2(b)(1) or alternatively, must replace the impacted pipe segment(s). If the anomaly is located one or more inches beyond the longitudinal pipe seam, then KMI must repair the anomaly with appropriate repair methods and procedures for the type of anomaly found pursuant to ASME-B31.4-2006 – Table 451.6.2(b)(1). In addition, KMI must give advance written notice to PHMSA and any State Pipeline Safety Program 15 days in advance of the repair(s) so staff has the option to attend the digs and observe the repair(s). When making repairs, KMI must document each in-line inspection (ILI) result and excavation result, including the location (state, county, survey station, lat/long), findings (length, width, depth and location to long seam), pipe properties (diameter, wall thickness, yield strength, seam, coating type, Charpy Impact value, etc.), type of equipment used to evaluate the anomaly, anomaly type (corrosion, cracking, etc.), and any pictures of the anomaly. Temporary Pressure Restrictions. KMI must take temporary pressure restrictions on all impacted segments. KMI must either take a 20% reduction in operating pressure using the pipeline’s operating pressure when KMI identified the issue, or calculate safe operating pressure by utilizing either API RP 579, CorLAS or PipeAssess, and 49 C.F.R. § 192.712(b) or (d) and (e), and the worst unrepaired anomaly known (i.e., the greatest percentage of metal loss) in the pipeline segment and calculating the failure pressure divided by 1.25 times. KMI must use the lower of these pressures.#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1615 5. 6. 7. 8. If KMI believes it cannot meet this requirement because it needs to maintain minimum flows to meet customer demands, it must immediately notify PHMSA and request approval, explaining the reason(s) why temporarily reducing pressure pursuant to the requirements set forth above is infeasible. In its written proposal to PHMSA, KMI must propose an alternative means to assure pipeline safety. Once KMI has remediated all anomalies on the affected segment(s), KMI must notify the Director in writing and may request that the pressure restriction(s) be lifted. Work Plan. Within 30 days after a Safety Order is issued, KMI must develop and submit to the Director for approval a written remedial work plan that includes the corrective measures set forth in this Order. The work plan must also include: (A) The performance of any additional field testing, inspections, and evaluations to determine whether and to what extent the conditions described in this Notice are present elsewhere on the affected pipeline systems. Make the results of the inspections, field excavations, and evaluations available to PHMSA or its representative; (B) The performance of evaluations and repairs to fully remediate the identified risk conditions as outlined above in Items 2 and 3. This must also include provisions for continuing long-term periodic testing and integrity verification measures to ensure the ongoing safe operation of the pipeline considering the results of the analyses, inspections, and corrective measures undertaken pursuant to the safety order; and (C) A proposed schedule for completion of the actions required by paragraphs (A) and (B) of this Item. Pursuant to Item 1, Priority 1 anomalies must be remediated within 60 days of issuance of the Safety Order. Priority 2 anomalies must be remediated within 90 days of issuance of the Safety Order. Priority 3 anomalies must be remediated within 120 days of issuance of the Safety Order. Pursuant to Item 1, KMI must propose repair timelines for Priority 4 and Priority 5 anomalies. Revise the remedial work plan as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities. Submit any such plan revisions in writing to the Director for prior approval. The Director may approve plan elements incrementally. The remedial work plan shall become incorporated into the Safety Order. Implement the work plan as it is approved by the Director, including any revisions to the plan. In-Line Inspections. KMI must conduct in-line inspections (ILIs) on all its impacted segments that have not had an assessment within the last five (5) years pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(j). The ILI tool run, including HR-geometry, HR-deformation, HR- MFL, ultrasonic (UT) crack, Electro-Magnetic Acoustic Transducer (EMAT) if#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1716 9. 10. 11. 12. applicable, Inertial Mapping Unit (IMU), or other equivalent ILI tools, and anomaly discovery date(s) must not be over 12 months from the date this Safety Order is issued. Close Interval Surveys. Within six (6) months after issuance of the Safety Order, KMI must conduct an “on and off” current Close Interval Survey (CIS) at a maximum 5-foot spacing along the entire length of each anomaly area as described below: A. KMI must evaluate each anomaly area in accordance with 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.571 and 195.573(a)(2), and accomplish the objectives of Paragraph 10.1.1.3 of NACE SP 0169; B. For inadequate cathodic protection (CP) level determination, KMI must conduct a CIS in both directions (a minimum of 1,000 feet) from the anomaly and until the CIS ends at test stations with adequate CP levels; C. KMI must remediate any findings within six (6) months of the CIS. In instances where inadequate potentials are a result of an electrical short to an adjacent foreign structure, a rectifier malfunction, an interruption of power source, or an interruption of CP current due to other non-systemic or location-specific causes, KMI must document and repair these instances. A CIS will not be required. Guidance Materials Review. KMI must review its means of tracking agency guidance materials, including Frequently Asked Questions, Advisory Bulletins, and other guidance documents issued by PHMSA, and conduct a comprehensive review to confirm that the company is utilizing accurate, up-to-date information, and is not relying on outdated guidance materials. KMI must prepare a written report and send it to the Director outlining the results of its review within 90 days of issuance of the Safety Order. Historical Records Review. For each impacted segment listed in the spreadsheets at Exhibit 1, KMI must review its material records, pressure test records, and alignment sheets for accuracy of diameter, wall thickness, pipe grade (yield strength), seam type, coating type, pressure test, and maximum operating pressure for accuracy. KMI must update the spreadsheets located at Exhibit 1 with any corrections, and confirm to PHMSA in writing that the information located within those spreadsheets are true and accurate.11 Submit quarterly reports to the Director that: (1) include available data and results of the testing and evaluations required by the safety order; and (2) describe the progress of the repairs and other remedial actions being undertaken. 11 For example, some of the information contained in the spreadsheets KMI provided to PHMSA located at Exhibit 1 may be inaccurate. For example, KMI noted that its CFPL 10-inch diameter mainline may have Double Submerged Arc Welded (DSAW) seam type; however, this is not generally seen in pipes as small as 10-inches in diameter. See, e.g., ASME Research Report, History of Line Pipe Manufacturing in North America, CRTD-Vol. 43 (1996), pgs. C21- C24. Additionally, KMI has indicated that it has coal tar coating on pipelines that are less than thirty years old.#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1817 13. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance with any of the terms of the safety order upon a written request timely submitted demonstrating good cause for an extension. 14. Respondent may appeal any decision of the Director to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. Decisions of the Associate Administrator shall be final. 15. It is requested (not mandated) that KMI maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Safety Order and submit the total to Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested that these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure. The actions proposed by this Notice of Proposed Safety Order are in addition to and do not waive any requirements that apply to Respondent’s pipeline system under 49 C.F.R. Parts 190 through 199, under any other order issued to Respondent under authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60101 et seq., or under any other provision of Federal or state law. After receiving and analyzing additional data in the course of this proceeding and implementation of the work plan, KMI or PHMSA may identify other impacted segments and PHMSA may identify other safety measures that need to be taken. In that event, Respondent will be notified of any proposed additional measures and, if necessary, amendments to the work plan or safety order. ___________________________________ __________________ Dustin Hubbard Date issued Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration cc: Alan Mayberry, Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, OPS, PHMSA Linda Daugherty, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS, PHMSA Jaime Hernandez, Director, Engineering: Codes and Standards, KMI Toby Fore, Director, Pipeline Integrity, KMI Jorge Torres, Vice President, Pipeline Integrity, KMI Wallace Jones, Director Pipeline Safety Division, Alabama Public Service Commission Eric Villa, Program Manager - Pipeline Safety Section, Arizona Corporation Commission Jim Hosler, Asst. Deputy Director, Pipeline Safety Div., Office of the State Fire Marshal, California Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection Michael Peikert, Asst. Director, Pipeline Division, Louisiana Dept. of Natural Resources Jason Montoya, Bureau Chief, Pipeline Safety Bureau, New Mexico Public Reg. Comm. Stephanie Weidman, PHMSA Program Manager, Pipeline Safety, Texas Railroad Comm.#

52021056NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212021_(21-210445)_text.pdf, page 1918 Lauren Govoni, Pipeline Safety Director, Virginia State Corp. Comm. Scott Marshall, Pipeline Safety Program Manager, Virginia State Corp. Comm. Joseph Dragovich, Program Manager - Gas Pipeline Safety, Public Utilities Comm. of Ohio#