Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a44e7e458f9311f8

Jump to content

Talk:Kinder Morgan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 4 days ago by DPComm in topic Edit Request - WSJ Article

KinderMorgan has received complaints from homeowners in Northern New Jersey/Rockland County New York area about the lack of proper infrastructure and annual maintenance on their right-of-way/easement bordering homeowners property. The company has ignored, deflected, and continues to disclaim their responsibilities to be a "good neighbor". As a result, invasive reeds and flooding have resulted, causing physical damage to homeowners' property. The situtation is ongoing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SummerTwo (talk • contribs) 13:58, 23 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Copyedit

[edit]

This article needs a copy editing for the style. Right now it reads as advertisement of the company.Beagel (talk) 09:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree (three years later perhaps but better late than never). With an IPO forthcoming I think an edit that helps this article comform to Wikipedia standards is in order. I'm no editing pro but in the coming days I will try to do my best.alaroz33 (talk) 06:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Kinder Morgan, Inc.

[edit]

I have corrected the name of the company to the proper name, based on government filings such as this one: http://www.kindermorgan.com/investor/kmi_2006_annual_report_financials.pdfHatBucketBalls (talk) 16:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Correctives added

[edit]

including the CEO's net worth & pipeline safety issues as a reality check to make it sound less like an advert for the company. Also added more subsidiaries b/c one difficulty of researching this company is that it has so many holdings without "Kinder Morgan" in their names.HollyJack (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Remove Trans Mountain Part

[edit]

There is a separate article specifically about the pipeline see here (Kinder Morgan Trans-Mountain Pipeline System) should the pipeline page be deleted or should the section in the Kinder Morgan Article be removed... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackery01 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Merge this section into Kinder Morgan Trans-Mountain Pipeline System, then summarize here. Beagel (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
 Done. Merger completed. Beagel (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Additional Accident

[edit]

The accidents section failed to mention the rupture of the Calnev Pipeline in San Bernardino, Calirofnia on May 25, 1982. The Calnev Pipeline ruptured due to disturbance from clean up of the San Bernardino train derailment in California that occurred thirteen days earlier. Dwab17 (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

I didn't remove this, but that train wreck happened long before Kinder Morgan even existed so should it even be here? The owner at the time of the accident was Calnev Pipe Line Co not Kinder Morgan. See this link: http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/calnev-pipe-line-co (Philbert) 2605:A000:1407:81B3:8882:9286:4A32:D8F0 (talk) 11:03, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kinder Morgan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

What caused the 2015 stock price crash of KMI?

[edit]

What caused the huge 2015 stock price crash of KMI stock from a high of $44.71 to $15, from which it has never recovered? (It is now far below its IPO price). The article is silent as to any goings-on during that time period. Thanks in advance to anybody who knows.

https://www.barchart.com/stocks/quotes/KMI/interactive-chart Betathetapi454 (talk) 08:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Edit Request - WSJ Article

[edit]

Edit Request: “The 2013 Wall Street Journal article "Is Kinder Morgan Scrimping on its Pipelines?" noted that one investment analyst claimed the company was deferring maintenance spending in order to return more cash to its investors.[45]”

I work for Kinder Morgan in a communications role and have a conflict of interest.

The current text states that investment analyst Kevin Kaiser claimed Kinder Morgan was deferring maintenance spending in order to return more cash to investors. While this is supported by sources, the current wording appears to give undue weight to the allegation without summarizing the significant counterarguments reported in the same coverage.

Reporting on the controversy notes that Kinder Morgan disputed the allegations and Kevin Kaiser’s credibility on the topic was called into question. Morningstar analyst Jason Stevens stated that "maintenance capex is broadly in line with MLP industry practices." Goldman analyst Theodore Durbin also contended that Kinder Morgan's maintenance capital expenditures were in line with its peers. Subsequent coverage also documents Rich Kinder's public response and defense of the company's maintenance-spending policies. I have not found evidence that regulators or courts later substantiated the underlying allegation.

Per WP:NPOV and WP:DUE, I suggest removing this section or revising it to summarize both the allegation and the contemporaneous responses.

Proposed wording:

"In 2013, analyst Kevin Kaiser of Hedgeye Risk Management alleged that Kinder Morgan was reducing maintenance spending on pipeline assets in order to increase cash distributions to investors. Kinder Morgan denied the allegations, and other analysts, including Morningstar's Jason Stevens and Goldman Sachs’ Theodore Durbin, argued that the company's maintenance spending appeared broadly consistent with industry practice."


Sources:

$14 billion worth of projects in pipeline at Kinder Morgan

Upstart analyst says Kinder 'starves' assets for investors | Fox Business

Microsoft Word - KMP Responses to Barron's (2014-02-23) vF.docx DPComm (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2026 (UTC)DPComm (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Edit Request - 2009 PHMSA Citation

[edit]

Edit Request: “In 2009, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) cited Kinder Morgan for violating safety standards regarding the distance between a natural gas pipeline and a "high consequence area" such as a school or hospital; the pipeline was too close for safe operation in case of a leak.[41]”

I work for Kinder Morgan in a communications role and have a conflict of interest.

The current wording appears to mischaracterize the PHMSA enforcement action. The currently linked PHMSA Final Order for CPF 5-2007-1008 does not state that Kinder Morgan violated a minimum distance requirement between a pipeline and a school, hospital, or other High Consequence Area (HCA), nor does it state that the pipeline was "too close for safe operation." Instead, PHMSA found that Kinder Morgan did not properly report all HCAs that could be affected by its pipelines.

Per WP:V, article text should reflect what the cited source actually says. The PHMSA order discusses HCA identification, not a finding that a pipeline was physically too close to an HCA. I suggest revising this section to improve accuracy.

Additionally, this passage describes a 2009 citation as an open matter. PHMSA closed the case in 2010 (see link below), so I propose adding this outcome and moving this excerpt into the “History” section per the criticism flag under the “Controversies” section.

Proposed wording:

“In 2009, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) cited Kinder Morgan for failing to properly identify all High Consequence Areas (HCAs) that could be affected by its natural gas pipelines.[41] The case was resolved and consequently closed in 2010.”

Source: Enforcement Action Details: 520071008 | Enforcement Data | PHMSA DPComm (talk) 16:32, 29 September 2026 (UTC)DPComm (talk) 19:58, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Edit Request - 2011 PHMSA Citation

[edit]

Edit Request: “In 2011, PHMSA cited Kinder Morgan for failing to maintain update maps showing pipeline locations, test pipeline safety devices, maintain firefighting equipment, inspect its pipelines as required, and adequately monitor pipes’ corrosion levels.[42]”

I work for Kinder Morgan in a communications role and have a conflict of interest.

According to PHMSA case documents for CPF 5-2011-5005, PHMSA withdrew the original allegation regarding the testing of pipeline safety devices. Page three of the Final Order, linked below, shows that PHMSA withdrew the allegation after Kinder Morgan provided records demonstrating that the required inspections and testing of the pressure-control equipment at the Wild Horse Pump Station had been performed. As a result, PHMSA did not make a finding of violation on that item.

Additionally, this passage describes a 2011 citation as an open matter. PHMSA closed the case in 2012 (see link below), so I propose adding this outcome and moving this excerpt into the “History” section per the criticism flag under the “Controversies” section.

Therefore, I suggest removing “test pipeline safety devices” from this excerpt and adding “the case was resolved and consequently closed in 2012.”

Sources:

520115005_FinalOrder_03232012.pdf

Enforcement Action Details: 520115005 | Enforcement Data | PHMSA DPComm (talk) 16:21, 29 September 2026 (UTC)DPCommDPComm (talk) 20:24, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply