COLORADO SPRINGS, CITY OF — Safety Order

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFVIA 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).#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_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 ) ) 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.#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 3155,301 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 4• 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 5from 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 6• 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 7Board 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 83. 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 9b. 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.#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 10Response 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#

52024034NOPSO_Notice of Proposed Safety Order_10212024_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 11PHP-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, page 1Official PDFSeptember 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#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_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 ) ) ) 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#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 3U.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.#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 4As 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.#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 56. 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.#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 6II. 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 the highest risk as identified by DRAM. Geography: CSU’s Risk Model results will be subdivided, as appropriate, by pressure districts, isolation areas, or individual assets. The implementation of full block renewals will depend on the density and location of high-risk assets. Other Considerations: Factors such as permitting, customer cooperation, and the involvement of political or government entities will be taken into account. CSU will also validate the risk model results through a review by CSU’s Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). This validation process ensures that the results reflect the expertise and judgment of CSU’s SMEs. Revisions to the Prioritization Process: CSU may revise the Prioritization Process as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities per Provision 19. 16. Remedial Work Plan. Immediately following the Effective Date of this Agreement, CSU must follow the Remedial Work Plan set forth below:#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 7A. B. C. Identification of All Affected Pipe: CSU must continue performing data analysis and field data collection to identify pipe segments within the scope of Affected Pipe. CSU has identified the following as part of Affected Pipe as defined within its 2024 Gas Distribution Annual Report: • 1.24 Miles of Bare Unprotected Steel Mains • 0.004 Miles of Coated Unprotected Steel Mains • 3624 Bare Unprotected Steel Services • 1520 Coated Unprotected Steel Services On a quarterly basis, as required in Provision 18, CSU must notify PHMSA of any changes to the identification of all Affected Pipe. Identification of Remedial Actions Necessary to Address Integrity Risks on All Affected Pipe: CSU will implement the necessary remedial actions to fully address the identified risk conditions for all Affected Pipe, in accordance with the schedule outlined in Provision 16, Paragraph C. The following methods will be utilized to ensure effective remediation: • Install additional cathodic protection (CP) measures or verify existing CP • Recoating of pipe segments or verify existing coating • Replacement of Affected Pipe On a quarterly basis, as required in Provision 18, CSU must notify PHMSA of all remedial actions taken to address integrity risks on all Affected Pipe. Schedule to Remediate Identified Affected Pipe: CSU will remediate known Affected Pipe within a 10-year remediation schedule. The schedule for replacement, repair, or remediation is outlined as follows: Year Cumulative Mains Replaced or Cathodically Protected Cumulative Services Replaced or Cathodically Protected 2025 5% 5% 2026 20% 12% 2027 50% 24% 2028 80% 37% 2029 100% 52% 2030 65% 2031 77% 2032 87% 2033 95% 2034 100%#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 8D. E. F. On a quarterly basis, as required in Provision 18, CSU must provide PHMSA with progress updates on the 10-year remediation schedule and notify PHMSA if CSU is unable to meet the schedule, including explanations for any delays. CSU may include in the required report when it has identified a risk of not meeting the schedule, and any explanation relating to the identified risk. Risk Assessment and Mitigation Prioritization: CSU will conduct its risk assessment and mitigation prioritization according to its DIMP. CSU will remediate 30 of the 40 service lines with the highest risk scores each year starting in 2026. Analysis of the non-remediated service lines will take place at the beginning of each calendar year and be reported as part of the previous year’s 4th quarterly report (i.e., the 40 remaining service lines with the highest risk score to be targeted for remediation in 2026 will be identified in the 2025 Q4 report submitted to PHMSA on or before January 31, 2026). Further, CSU may adjust its prioritization of remediation work as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities. Additional Testing Schedule and Requirements for Ongoing Long-Term Periodic Testing: CSU will monitor for conditions described in the Notice in accordance with its DIMP. CSU will continue to collect data during routine operations, such as when pipelines are exposed for any reason (e.g., during maintenance, construction, keyholing, or other operational activities). The Gas Condition Assessment Program will be implemented annually, with at least 75 target inspections for field verification, based on the DIMP Risk Model’s results or when data gaps are identified within GIS data sets. These targeted inspections will be focused on areas with high risk or those where previous data is either lacking or questionable. Revisions to the Remedial Work Plan: CSU may revise the Remedial Work Plan as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities per Provision 19. 17. Leak Mitigation Plan. Following the Effective Date of this Agreement, CSU must follow the Leak Mitigation Plan set forth below: A. Leak Survey: CSU will conduct an annual leak survey on all Affected Pipe utilizing existing equipment and methods until all assets are either remediated or replaced. On a quarterly basis, as required in Provision 18, CSU must notify PHMSA of any leaks on all Affected Pipe. B. Leak Classification: CSU will conduct an internal audit of its leak grading policy in the Operations and Maintenance Manual in 2025 to ensure it aligns with Gas Piping Technology Committee (GPTC) guidance (2022 Edition).#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 9C. Leak Repair: CSU must repair identified leaks on Affected Pipe in accordance with the following: CSU will take continuous and immediate action to fully repair or replace assets with Grade 1 leaks or otherwise ensure conditions are no longer hazardous. If a temporary mitigative measure is taken to ensure the leak is no longer hazardous, the leak shall be fully repaired within 15 months. CSU will fully repair or replace assets with Grade 2 leaks within 15 months from the date of discovery. CSU will monitor Grade 3 leaks on affected pipe at a minimum of every 15 months until the leak is regraded or no longer results in a reading. On a quarterly basis, as required in Provision 18, CSU must provide PHMSA with status updates on leak repairs for all Affected Pipe and notify PHMSA if CSU was unable to meet the commitments, including explanations for any delays. D. Revisions to the Leak Mitigation Plan: CSU may revise the Leak Mitigation Plan as necessary to incorporate new information obtained during the evaluations and associated remedial activities per Provision 19. 18. Reporting. Following the Effective Date of this Agreement, CSU must report to PHMSA on a quarterly basis the results of its Remedial Work Plan and Leak Mitigation Plan, including but not limited to: A. B. C. D. E. F. Changes to all Affected Pipe classification. Remedial actions taken to address integrity risks on all Affected Pipe or mitigation measures that result in a material or CP category change, until all Affected Pipe are remediated. Progress updates on the 10-year remediation schedule, including explanations for any delays if CSU has identified a risk of not meeting the schedule or is unable to meet the schedule outlined in Provision 16, Paragraph C. The results of new risk model updates, which results will produce the then-current prioritization of remediation work. The presence of any leaks on any of the Affected Pipe, the grade of those leaks, and the age (described in aging days and/or months) of the active leaks. Status updates on repaired leaks, including explanations for any delays if CSU was unable to meet the commitments. CSU must submit these reports no later than the last day of the month following the close of a quarter (i.e., 2nd quarter status report would be due no later than July 31st). 19. Revisions. Following the Effective Date of this Agreement, CSU must submit in writing any proposed revisions to the Prioritization Process, Remedial Work Plan, and Leak Mitigation Plan to the Director in accordance with Section IV of this agreement and await a written approval before implementation of the requested revision. The Director’s determination#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 10will not be unreasonably delayed. Documentation will include the reason(s) for revision(s), applicable data or findings, and, if applicable, an amended schedule for risk mitigation. 20. Extensions of Time. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance with any of the terms of this Agreement upon a written request timely submitted demonstrating good cause for the extension. The Director shall respond in writing to any such request within 30 calendar days. IV. Review and Approval Process: 21. 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, Respondent will take all actions as approved by the Director, subject to Respondent’s right to invoke the dispute resolution procedures with respect to any conditions the Director identifies. If the Director disapproves all or any portion of the submission, the Director will provide Respondent written notice of the deficiencies, subject to Respondent’s right to contest the disapproval through the dispute resolution procedures. Respondent will correct all deficiencies within the time specified by the Director and resubmit the submission for approval. V. Dispute Resolution: 22. The Director and Respondent will informally attempt to resolve any disputes arising under this Agreement, including any decision of the Director under the terms of Section III (Corrective Measures). If Respondent and the Director are unable to informally resolve the dispute within 30 calendar days after the dispute is first raised, in writing, to the Director, Respondent may submit a written request for a determination resolving the dispute from the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, PHMSA. Such request must be made in writing and provided to the Director, counsel for the Western Region, and to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, no later than 15 calendar days from the 30-day deadline for informal resolution referenced in this Provision. Along with its request, Respondent must provide the Associate Administrator with all information Respondent believes is relevant to the dispute. Decisions of the Associate Administrator under this Provision will constitute final agency action, subject to judicial review pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60119. 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 Associate Administrator in writing.#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 11VI. Enforcement: 23. This Agreement is subject to all enforcement authorities available to PHMSA under 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and 49 CFR Part 190. All work plans and associated schedules set forth or referenced in Section III will be automatically incorporated into this Agreement and are enforceable in the same manner. VII. Effective Date: 24. Effective Date, as used herein, is the date on which the Consent Order is issued by the Associate Administrator, PHMSA, incorporating the terms of this Agreement. VIII. Recordkeeping and Information Disclosure: 25. Unless otherwise required in this Agreement, Respondent agrees to maintain records demonstrating compliance with all requirements of this Agreement for a period of at least five (5) years following completion of all work to be performed, unless a longer period of time is required by law. For any reports, plans, or other deliverables required to be submitted to PHMSA pursuant to this Agreement, Respondent 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 CFR Part 7. Respondent must mark the claim of confidentiality in writing on each page and include a statement specifying the grounds for each claim of confidentiality. PHMSA determines release of any information submitted pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 CFR Part 7, the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, DOT and PHMSA policies, and other applicable regulations and Executive Orders. IX. Modification: 26. 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. Force Majeure 27. Respondent agrees to perform all the terms of this Agreement within the timeframes established within this Agreement, including pursuant to modifications under Section IX, unless performance is delayed by a force majeure. For purposes of this Agreement, a force majeure is defined by an event arising from causes beyond the Respondent’s control, or any entity controlled by Respondent or Respondent’s contractors, which delays or prevents performance of any obligation under this Agreement despite Respondent’s commercially reasonable efforts to fulfill the obligation. 28. If a force majeure event occurs or has occurred that delays the performance of any term of this Agreement beyond the approved timeframe, Respondent shall notify the Director, in#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 12writing, within 15 calendar days of when Respondent knew that the event would cause or has caused 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 for implementation of those measures. Failure to comply with the notice provision of this Provision and to undertake reasonable efforts to avoid and minimize the delay shall waive any claim of force majeure by Respondent. 29. If the Director determines, upon notification by Respondent, that a 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 that are not affected by the force majeure. XI. Termination: 30. This Agreement will remain in effect until the Corrective Measures in Section III, Provision 16, Paragraph C are satisfied, as reasonably and timely determined by the Director. This Agreement shall not terminate until the Director confirms, in writing, that this Agreement is terminated in accordance with this Provision. Nothing in this Agreement prevents Respondent from completing any of the obligations earlier than the deadlines provided for in this Agreement. Respondent may request written confirmation from PHMSA when this Agreement is terminated, and the Director will provide such confirmation. XII. Ratification: 31. 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. 32. The Parties hereby agree to all findings, conditions, and terms of this Agreement.#

52024034NOPSO_Consent Agreement and Order_09302025_(24-305110)_text.pdf, page 13For Colorado Springs Utilities: ___________________________________ Travas Deal, Chief Executive Officer ________________________ Date For PHMSA: ___________________________________ Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety ________________________ Date#