# COLORADO SPRINGS, CITY OF — Safety Order

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 52024034NOPSO
- **title:** COLORADO SPRINGS, CITY OF — Safety Order
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** current
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2024-10-21
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** OPEN safety order.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52024034nopso.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52024034nopso.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52024034nopso
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/52024034NOPSO
**body:**

Safety Order involving COLORADO SPRINGS, CITY OF. The dataset does not identify a cited regulation for this case. The case was opened on 2024-10-21 and is reported as open. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52024034NOPSO/52024034NOPSO_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_09302025_(24-305110).pdf

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52024034NOPSO/52024034NOPSO_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52024034NOPSO/52024034NOPSO_Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Safety%20Order_10212024_(24-305110).pdf

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52024034NOPSO/52024034NOPSO_Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Safety%20Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf

VIA E-MAIL TO: tdeal@csu.org
October 21, 2024
Travas Deal
President/CEO
Colorado Springs Utilities
PO BOX 1103
Colorado Springs, CO 80947
CPF 5-2024-034-NOPSO
Dear Mr. Deal:
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 natural gas distribution system
in Colorado Springs, Colorado1 to ensure pipeline safety. 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.
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 OPID for this asset is: 2568 (City of Colorado Springs).



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WESTERN REGION
LAKEWOOD, CO 80228
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
City of Colorado Springs, Colorado, ) CPF No. 5-2024-034-NOPSO
)
Respondent )
___________________________________)
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SAFETY ORDER
Background and Purpose
Pursuant to Chapter 601 of title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.), the Colorado Public Utilities
Commission (COPUC) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) have initiated an on-site inspection and information review of the safety of Colorado
Spring Utility’s (CSU) natural gas distribution system and Distribution Integrity Management
Program (DIMP) in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
As a result of the inspection, it appears that 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(l), PHMSA issues this Notice of Proposed Safety Order, 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 affected pipeline system is located in Colorado Springs, Colorado and is a natural gas
distribution system composed of 2,751.70 miles of main lines and 185,677 service lines.2
This includes 1.87 miles of bare unprotected steel main lines, 0.22 miles of coated
unprotected steel main lines, 808.49 miles of coated protected steel main lines, and
1,941.12 miles of plastic main lines. The main lines vary in size, from diameters ranging
2" or less to over 12". The system also includes 8,001 bare unprotected steel service lines,
2,412 coated unprotected steel service lines, 15,616 coated protected steel service lines,
2 See, CSU’s 2023 Annual Report, Part B – System Description, 1. General.



155,301 plastic service lines, and 4,347 unknown or “other” service lines.
3 The service
lines vary in size, from diameters ranging 1" or less to over 4" thru 8".
• The “affected pipe” includes all bare unprotected steel pipelines within the affected
pipeline system including all main lines and all service lines fitting this description.
• Approximately 320.5 miles of CSU’s main lines and 5,696 of CSU’s service lines were
installed before 1970.4 In addition, 25.9 miles of CSU’s main lines and 15,982 of CSU’s
service lines have an unknown installation date. Corrosion impairs the serviceability or
integrity of pipelines, leading to an increased threat of failure.
• On August 16, 2012, CSU implemented its DIMP Plan, Revision 1. This plan included a
bare steel replacement program.5
• Beginning in August 2017 and continuing through March 2018, COPUC conducted a
“Comprehensive Corrosion Audit” of CSU’s pipeline corrosion program procedures and
records for its gas distribution pipeline system.
• On December 22, 2017, COPUC issued a Request for Information (RFI): Requirements for
Corrosion Control, 49 CFR Part 192, Subpart I.6 In its February 14, 2018, RFI Response,
CSU provided requested data for Items 1-3 of the RFI and requested an extension until
March 30, 2018, for Item 4 of the RFI related to the requirements of 49 C.F.R.
§ 192.465(e).7
• In its March 30, 2018, RFI Response, CSU committed to a “systematic approach to enhance
(its) Corrosion Control Program and to identify areas of Active Corrosion8 on non-
cathodically protected buried steel pipe”, which included retention of outside consultant
expertise to make appropriate changes to its Corrosion Control Program by March 2020.9
• On April 18, 2018, COPUC issued a Notice of Probable Violation to CSU for violating 49
C.F.R §§ 192.457, 192.463, and 192.465.10 CSU documented the existence of the affected
pipe in its system, however CSU failed to cathodically protect its affected pipe as required
by § 192.457(b)(3) and CSU failed to provide records of the initial and 3-year evaluations
for active corrosion on these lines as required by §192.465(e).
3 “Other” indicates an unidentified pipe of any material not specifically designated on Form PHMSA F 7100.1-1
Annual Report for Calendar Year 2023 Gas Distribution System.
4 See, CSU 2023 Annual Report, Part B – System Description, 4. Miles of Main and Number of Services by Decade
of Installation
5 See, CSU’s DIMP Revision 1, August 16, 2012, Section 8.2.1 Corrosion
6 See, RFI-060-1347 Letter, December 22, 2017
7 See, CSU’s RFI Response, February 14, 2018
8 See § 192.3 Definitions, Active corrosion is defined as continuing corrosion, unless controlled, which could result
in a condition detrimental to public safety.
9 See, CSU’s RFI Response, March 30, 2018
10 See, COPUC NPV 01-060-2018, April 18, 2018



• On June 28, 2018, CSU and COPUC agreed on an alternate enforcement plan that
addressed the compliance issues in lieu of issuing a civil penalty. As part of this plan, CSU
hired a third-party consultant to conduct a Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threats
(SWOT) analysis of CSU’s Pipeline Safety Compliance Program (PSCP) and agreed to
purchase Business Intelligence (BI) software to better manage its compliance work.11
• From October 17 to 21, 2022, COPUC inspected CSU’s distribution pipeline system and
DIMP. COPUC found CSU was not in compliance with §§ 192.457(b)(3) and § 192.465(e)
for its affected pipe. In 2023, PHMSA assumed responsibility for the enforcement of
COPUC investigations.
• On April 12, 2023, CSU agreed to provide status reports to COPUC regarding CSU’s
Active Corrosion Analysis Program.12 This improvement project plan was initiated in
CSU’s March 30, 2018, RFI response, but CSU failed to produce any documents until
2023. The following status reports were provided: The Generation 1 report titled “2020
Records Only Analysis of Bare/Unprotected Steel Main Lines” was submitted on May 31,
2023. The Generation 2 report titled “2023 Records Only Analysis of Bare/Unprotected
Steel Service Lines” was submitted on December 31, 2023.
• The 2023 Active Corrosion Analysis report showed CSU had still failed to cathodically
protect its affected pipe as required by § 192.457(b)(3), despite finding multiple
indications of active corrosion through direct assessment and leak surveys. Cathodic
protection testing records show CSU had never cathodically protected its affected pipe,
resulting in active corrosion and a high number of Grade 1 and Grade 2 leaks.13 As of
December 2023, 85% of approximately 3.47 miles of affected main line pipe was directly
assessed and documented three instances of active corrosion. Leak surveys of CSU’s
affected service line pipe from 2020 through 2022, identified 51 corrosion leaks and one
instance of pipe exposure with pitting. Of the 51 active corrosion leaks found, 32 were
classified as Grade 1 and 19 as Grade 2, all of which were hazardous to public safety.14
Many of these service line leaks are located in residential neighborhoods and business
districts, including high-occupancy and multi-story buildings.15 Any leak of natural gas
11 See, CSU’s Response to NPV 01-060-2018 Letter, June 15, 2018, and Close-Out Letter, June 28, 2018
12 See, Email Between CSU and COPUC - 3/28 Summary and Steps Forward, April 12, 2023
13 Grade 1 leak is defined by the GPTC Guide as a leak that represents an existing or probable hazard to persons or
property, and requires immediate repair or continuous action until the conditions are no longer hazardous. Grade 2
leak is defined as a leak that is recognized as being non-hazardous at the time of detection, but requires scheduled
repair based on probable future hazard. See, GPTC Guide for Gas Transmission, Distribution, and Gathering Piping
Systems, 2022 Edition, Guide Material Appendix G-192-11, Gas leakage control guidelines for natural gas systems,
Section 5.5 Leak grades, Page 778
14 See, 2023 Active Corrosion Analysis, 12/31/2023, Section 5 Active Corrosion Analysis, Attachment B, and
Attachment D
15 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Section 4 Definitions, Business District



from the pipeline may migrate into a home or dwelling. Such breaches are a public safety
risk.
• CSU failed to evaluate its affected pipe every 3 years at intervals not exceeding 39
months as required by § 192.465(e). In Revision 1 of CSU’s DIMP Plan, dated August
16, 2012, CSU noted the presence of affected pipe, but failed to document the evaluation
of these pipelines for active corrosion until May 31, 2023, 10 years and 9 months later. In
Revision 4 of CSU’s DIMP Plan, dated March 28, 2022, CSU noted failure of its affected
pipe would have a high consequence to public safety.16 Actively corroding affected pipe
is detrimental to public safety, property and the environment. Failing to evaluate the
affected pipe every 3 years at intervals not exceeding 39 months means the threat of
failure is unknown and has not been properly evaluated.
• CSU’s natural gas distribution system serves the communities of Colorado Springs,
Manitou, Security, Widefield, Falcon, Colorado Centre and Gleneagle.17 The geographical
area features a semi-arid climate with cold winters and warm summers. Temperatures range
from around 15°F in winter to 85°F in summer, with an average annual rainfall of about
16". Soil types in the region vary, including sandy loam and clayey soils.
• CSU's natural gas distribution system is divided into 46 pressure districts. Distribution
main lines are further divided into two pressure groups: the 150 psig maximum allowable
operating pressure (MAOP) distribution system and 76 psig or less MAOP systems. The
150 psig MAOP main line system is fed from the five city gate stations (from North to
South: McClintock, North, South, Drennan and Security).18 Pressure districts are
summarized in Appendix A, Section 4 of CSU’s DIMP plan.
19
• According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Colorado Spring’s population density was projected
to be 2,522 in 2023, based on an average growth rate of 1.66% since 2009.
20 The general
boundaries of the service territories are: North Gate Road to the North, Fontaine Boulevard
to the South, Curtis Road to the East, and Slightly West of the community of Manitou
Springs. In addition, Colorado Springs Utilities delivers natural gas to several local military
bases including, the Air Force Academy, Fort Carson Army Post, Cheyenne Air Force
Station, and Peterson Air Force Base.21 The distribution system traverses residential
neighborhoods and business districts, including high-occupancy and multi-story buildings.
16 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Appendix C, Section 1) Program Level Threat Identification Matrix
17 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Section 1.0 Scope, Purpose, and Objectives
18 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Section 5.3.2 Current Design
19 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Appendix A, Table A-4 Pressure Districts Summary
20 Population Density is computed by dividing the total population by Land Area Per Square Mile.
21 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Section 1.0 Scope, Purpose, and Objectives



• The number of unprotected or unidentified service lines increased from 12,669 in 2022 to
14,760 in 2023, an increase of 2,091 service lines over a one-year period.
22 CSU recognizes
in its current DIMP plan, Appendix C, that corrosion is its highest frequency of failure23
and the affected pipe is an elevated threat due to its proximity to residences and structures.24
CSU has a bare steel replacement program. However, the current program would take
approximately 80 years to replace all 8001 bare steel service lines25 at a rate of 100 service
lines replaced per year.
26 CSU is not replacing its affected pipe at a sufficient rate where it
will be able to mitigate the risks of failure for its remaining affected pipe. CSU must
implement a more effective leak mitigation plan designed to address these risks as required
by § 192.1007(d).
• In the last five years, there have been seven significant incidents that resulted in a house
explosion involving steel distribution lines nationwide.27 CSU’s affected pipe is an
increased safety risk to the people, property, and the environment. CSU must reduce the
safety risk by monitoring these pipelines with a more effective leak mitigation plan in
addition to taking prompt remedial action such as renewing or replacing pipe.
Proposed Issuance of Safety Order
Section 60117(l) 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.
In deciding whether to issue an order, PHMSA must consider the following, if relevant: (1) the
characteristics of the pipe and other equipment used in the pipeline facility, including the age,
manufacture, physical properties, and method of manufacturing, constructing, or assembling the
equipment; (2) the nature of the material the pipeline facility transports, the corrosive and
deteriorative qualities of the material, the sequence in which the material is transported, and the
pressure required for transporting the material; (3) the aspects of the area in which the pipeline
facility is located, including climatic and geologic conditions and soil characteristics; (4) the
proximity of the area in which the hazardous gas pipeline facility is located to environmentally
sensitive areas; (5) the population density and population and growth patterns of the area in which
the pipeline facility is located; (6) any recommendation of the National Transportation Safety
22 See, CSU 2022 and 2023 Annual Report, Part B – System Description, 1. General
23 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Appendix C, Threats Chart
24 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Appendix D, Utilities Threat Ranking 5
25 See, CSU 2023 Annual Report, Part B – System Description, 1. General
26 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Section 9.2.5 Bare Steel Services Renewals
27 PHMSA Data Mart, 2019 – 2023 Advanced Incident Report, Gas Distribution



Board made under another law; (7) the likelihood that the condition will impair the serviceability
of the pipeline; (8) the likelihood that the condition will worsen over time; and (9) the likelihood
that the condition is present or could develop on other areas of the pipeline.
After evaluating the foregoing preliminary findings of fact and considering the characteristics of
the affected pipeline system, including the age of the pipe involved, the hazardous nature of the
product transported, the existing and potential impacts to property and the environment, the
characteristics of the geographical areas where the pipeline facility is located, including proximity
to multi-story businesses and homes28
, the previous failures to cathodically protect its affected
pipe as required by § 192.457(b)(3) and to provide records of the initial and 3-year evaluations for
active corrosion on these lines as required by §192.465(e), and the likelihood that the conditions
could worsen or develop on other areas of the pipeline and potentially impact its serviceability, it
appears that the continued operation of the affected pipeline 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.
Proposed Corrective Measures
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117(l) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.239, PHMSA proposes to issue to CSU a
safety order incorporating the following remedial requirements with respect to the affected
pipeline:
1. 2. Definitions: For the purpose of this Notice, the following terms are defined as:
a. “Director” is the Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
b. “Effective Date” is the date a Safety Order is issued;
c. “Affected Pipeline System” means CSU’s natural gas distribution system
composed of 2,751.70 miles of main lines and 185,677 service lines.
d. “Affected Pipe” means the bare unprotected steel pipelines within the Affected
Pipeline System including all main lines and service lines that meet that description.
e.
Remedial Work Plan: Within 60 days of the Effective Date, CSU must develop and submit
to the Director for approval a written Remedial Work Plan that includes corrective
measures.
a. The work plan must include:
i. Identification of all affected pipe.
28 See, CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Section 4 Definitions, Business District



3. ii. Identification of remedial actions necessary to address non-compliance on
all affected pipe.
iii. A schedule to remediate the identified affected pipe. When considering the
remediation schedule, CSU must prioritize lines that pose the greatest risk
to safety and the environment. When assessing the level of risk, CSU must
consider the following factors: leak frequency, pressure, volume of leakage,
location of piping, location of dwelling and other structures.
iv. The remediation schedule shall include proposed timelines for the
following:
1. installing additional CP,
2. recoating the pipe,
3. replacing the pipe29, or
4. repairing the pipe.
v. A schedule for the performance of 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
system. Make the results of the inspections, field excavations, and
evaluations available to PHMSA or its representatives.
vi. All repairs or other corrective measures proposed in the Remedial Work
Plan must fully remediate the identified risk conditions.
vii. The Plan must 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.
b. CSU may revise the Remedial Work Plan as necessary to incorporate new
information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities.
CSU must submit any such Plan revisions to the Director for prior approval. The
Director may approve plan elements incrementally. The Remedial Work Plan shall
become incorporated into the Safety Order.
c. CSU must implement the Plan as it is approved by the Director, including any
revisions to the Plan.
Leak Mitigation Plan: Within 60 days of the Effective Date, CSU must determine and
implement measures designed to reduce the risks of failure of its affected pipe as required
by § 192.1007(d). Specifically, CSU must develop and implement an effective Leak
Mitigation Plan that includes, at minimum:
a. Leak surveys on all affected pipe and unidentified distribution lines must take place
every three months.30
29 Pipe replacement may include "renewal" of the pipe where plastic pipe is inserted into an existing pipeline. See,
CSU DIMP Revision 4, March 28, 2022, Appendix A, Table A-2 Pipe Installation Method History
30 See, GPTC Guide for Gas Transmission, Distribution, and Gathering Piping Systems, 2022 Edition, §192.723
Distribution systems: Leakage surveys, Section 1.3 Increased frequency, Page 403



b. Classification of all leaks as defined by the Gas Piping Technology Committee
Guide 2022 Edition (GTPC Guide).
c. Repair of identified leaks in accordance with the below schedule:
i. Grade 1 leaks must be repaired or replaced promptly as required by
§ 192.703(c).
ii. iii. Grade 2 leaks must be repaired or replaced within six months.
Grade 3 leaks must be monitored every three months as part of the leak
management program.
d. CSU must implement the Leak Mitigation Plan as it is approved by the Director,
including any future revisions to the Plan.
4. Quarterly Reports: Submit quarterly reports to the Director and COPUC 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.
5. Extensions of Time: 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.
6. Appeals: Respondent may appeal any decision of the Director to the Associate
Administrator for Pipeline Safety. Decisions of the Associate Administrator shall be final.
7. Documentation of Costs: It is requested (not mandated) that CSU 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, 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.



Response to this Notice
In accordance with § 190.239, CSU has 30 days following receipt of this Notice to submit a
written response to the official who issued the Notice. If CSU does not respond within 30 days,
this constitutes a waiver of its 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
CSU and to issue a Safety Order. In CSU’s response, CSU may notify that official that CSU
intends to comply with the terms of the Notice as proposed, or CSU may request that an informal
consultation be scheduled (CSU will also have the opportunity to request an administrative
hearing before a safety order is issued). Informal consultation provides CSU 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 CSU’s position in any subsequent hearing.
If CSU 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 CSU has elected not to request informal
consultation, CSU 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 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 CSU submits in response to this enforcement action is subject to
being made publicly available. If CSU believes that any portion of its 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 CSU believes
qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why CSU believes the redacted
information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).
In your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 5-2024-034-NOPSO and for each
document you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.
___________________________________ __________________
Dustin Hubbard Date issued
Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry



PHP-500 J. Berry, J. Luo (#24-305110)
Casey Hensley, COPUC Program Manager - Casey.Hensley@state.co.us

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf

September 30, 2025
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: tdeal@csu.org
Travas Deal
President/CEO
Colorado Springs Utilities
PO Box 1103
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80947
CPF No. 5-2024-034-NOPSO
Dear Mr. Deal:
Enclosed please find a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement between
the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Colorado Springs
Utilities, an enterprise of the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado, which was executed on
September 4, 2025. 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 CFR § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Linda Daugherty
Acting Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure: Consent Order and Consent Agreement
cc: Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
David Beckett, Senior Attorney, Utilities Division, Office of the City Attorney for
Colorado Springs, David.Beckett@coloradosprings.gov
CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUESTED



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
________________________________________________
In the Matter of )
)
)
Colorado Springs Utilities, an enterprise of the City of Colorado Springs Colorado)
)
Respondent. )
________________________________________________)
) CPF No. 5-2024-034-NOPSO
CONSENT ORDER
By letter dated October 21, 2024, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), issued a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice) to
The City of Colorado Springs, Colorado. In accordance with 49 CFR § 190.239, the Notice
alleged that conditions exist on the natural gas distribution system in Colorado Springs, Colorado
that pose an integrity risk to public safety, property, or the environment. The Notice also
proposed that the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado 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, Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU or Respondent), an enterprise of the
City of Colorado Springs, Colorado, requested an informal consultation, whereupon the parties
engaged in discussions. As a result of those discussions, the Parties have agreed to a Consent
Agreement that settles all of the allegations in the Notice.
Accordingly, the Consent Agreement is hereby approved and incorporated by reference into this
Consent Order issued pursuant to § 190.219. CSU is hereby ordered to comply with the terms of
the Consent Agreement pursuant to its terms. 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 CFR § 190.223, or in 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 CFR § 190.5.
______________________ ______________________
Linda Daugherty Date Issued
Acting Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
________________________________________________
In the Matter of )
)
)
Colorado Springs Utilities, an enterprise of the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado)
)
Respondent. )
________________________________________________ )
) CPF No. 5-2024-034-NOPSO
CONSENT AGREEMENT
The Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) (Director), issued to the City of Colorado Springs,
Colorado by letter dated October 21, 2024, a Notice of Proposed Safety Order (Notice). In
accordance with 49 CFR § 190.239, the Notice alleged that conditions exist on the natural gas
distribution system in Colorado Springs, Colorado that pose a pipeline integrity risk to public
safety, property, or the environment. The Notice also proposed that Colorado Springs Utilities
(CSU or Respondent) Colorado take certain corrective measures to remedy the alleged
conditions and ensure that the public, property, and the environment were protected from the
potential risk.
CSU is an enterprise of the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado, a Colorado home rule city and
municipal corporation. CSU owns and operates the natural gas distribution system referenced in
the Notice. CSU is the municipal utility that provides natural gas service in and around Colorado
Springs, Colorado. CSU responded on October 23, 2024, and requested an informal consultation
pursuant to 49 CFR § 190.239(b)(2). The first informal consultation was held on November 14,
2024. On November 19, 2024, CSU emailed the Director by attaching its November 18, 2024
letter requesting an extension of time until January 31, 2025, to formally respond to the Notice,
as well as another informal consultation. On January 27, 2025, a second informal consultation
was held. On January 31, 2025, CSU provided its draft Remedial Work Plan and Leak
Mitigation Plan to PHMSA. On February 12, 2025, a final informal consultation was held. In
response to a request for additional information made on March 12, 2025, CSU provided
additional material to PHMSA on April 3, 2025.



As a result of the informal consultation process, PHMSA and Respondent (the Parties) agree that
settlement of this proceeding by entry into this Consent Agreement (Agreement) is the most
appropriate means of resolving the issues raised in the Notice, will avoid further administrative
proceedings or litigation, and is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to 49 CFR §§ 190.219
and 190.239(b)(2), without adjudication of any issue of law or fact, and upon consent and
agreement, the Parties agree to the following terms and conditions.
I. General Provisions:
1. Respondent acknowledges that as the operator of the pipeline facilities subject to
the Notice, Respondent and its referenced pipeline facilities are 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. Respondent does not admit or deny any of the allegations in the Notice but
agrees, for purposes of this Agreement, to address the integrity risks identified in the Notice by
completing 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, the Agency’s
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 of settlement until accepted by the Associate Administrator. Once accepted,
the Associate Administrator will issue a Consent Order incorporating the terms of this
Agreement.
4. Respondent consents to the issuance of the Consent Order, 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, except for the Dispute Resolution
provisions set forth herein.
5. This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon PHMSA and Respondent, its
officers, directors, 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 Respondent’s pipeline
system referenced herein, Respondent will provide (a) a copy of this Agreement to the
prospective transferee at least 30 calendar days prior to such transfer and (b) written notice of the
transfer to the Director no later than 60 calendar days after the transfer occurs.
7. This Agreement constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive agreement and
understanding between the Parties with respect to the allegations in the Notice and 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.
The terms of this Agreement will control in the event of conflict.
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 applicable 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.
10. This Agreement does not create rights in, or grant any cause of action to, any third
party not party to this Agreement. Pursuant to Colorado Springs City Code Section 12.1.109, all
contracts executed in the name of “Colorado Springs Utilities”, including this Agreement, shall
be interpreted or construed by any reviewing body as having been executed by the City of
Colorado Springs on behalf of CSU. 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. The U.S.
Department of Transportation, its officers, employees, agents, and representatives shall not be
liable for any cause of action arising from any acts or omissions of Respondent or its contractors
in carrying out any work required by this Agreement.
11. This Agreement does not constitute a finding of violation of any Federal law or
regulation and may not be used in any civil proceeding of any kind as evidence or proof of any
fact, fault or liability, or as evidence of a violation of any law, rule, regulation, or requirement,
except in a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this Agreement.



II. Definitions:
12. “Affected Pipeline System” means CSU’s natural gas distribution system
composed of 2,781.413 miles of main lines and 188,199 service lines, as noted in its 2024 Gas
Distribution Annual Report.
13. “Affected Pipe” means (a) the coated unprotected steel main lines and services
lines and (b) the bare unprotected steel main lines and service lines within CSU’s Affected
Pipeline System.
14. The “Director” means the Director, Western Region, OPS, PHMSA
III. Corrective Measures:
15. Prioritization Process. Within 75 calendar days of the Effective Date of this
Agreement, CSU shall prioritize the Affected Pipe for mitigation in accordance with its
Distribution Integrity Management Plan (DIMP). The prioritization process will consider the
following factors:
A. B. C. D. Risk Model Results: CSU will calculate risk on the Affected Pipe using Gas
Technology Institute’s (GTI) Distribution Risk Assessment Model (DRAM).
CSU will use DRAM to assess and prioritize pipelines for mitigation, taking into
account factors such as leak frequency, pressure, piping location, and proximity to
structures. CSU will prioritize mitigating the Affected Pipe with
- **truncated:** true
- **body characters:** 55890