In this episode of the Pipeliners Podcast, Russel Treat talks with Tiffany Ziemer about how PHMSA approaches pipeline incident investigations. Tiffany is Director of Pipeline Safety and Regulatory Excellence at the SGA Natural Gas Association and a former PHMSA chief investigator. The conversation covers how PHMSA and the NTSB work alongside each other, why investigation reports take time, and how the industry might better learn from past incidents and standardize what it measures. Tiffany also shares her path from military police to federal service and what she plans to build for SGA members.

Inside PHMSA Incident Investigations Show Notes, Links, and Insider Terms

• SGA Natural Gas Association is a natural gas industry association providing training, conferences, and safety programs to its member companies. Tiffany recently joined SGA as Director of Pipeline Safety and Regulatory Excellence.
• PHMSA (Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration) is the U.S. DOT agency that regulates pipeline safety, including inspections, enforcement, rulemaking, and incident investigations. Tiffany spent more than a decade there, including as chief investigator.
• NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) is the independent federal agency that investigates significant transportation accidents, including pipeline incidents. It writes its own reports and issues safety recommendations that PHMSA may act on.
• National Response Center (NRC) is the federal point of contact for reporting releases and pipeline incidents, and one of the ways PHMSA first learns that an incident has occurred.
• Root cause analysis is the process of determining the underlying reasons an incident happened. PHMSA and the NTSB each reach their own root cause conclusions, which typically align.
• Incident command is the on-site management structure used during an emergency response. A deployed PHMSA investigator relays information from incident command back to headquarters.
• Metallurgical and lab analysis is the testing of failed pipe and components, and one of the main reasons final investigation reports can take a year or more.
• Rulemaking is the formal process by which PHMSA creates or revises regulations. Tiffany wants to help operators prepare their compliance posture before rules are finalized.
• Natural compliance is Russel’s term for writing procedures and building systems so that compliance records are created as a byproduct of doing the work.
• KPIs and benchmarking refers to Russel’s proposal that the industry agree on three to six key performance indicators per major area of operations, all tracked the same way, so operators can benchmark against one another.
• Operator Qualification (OQ) is the federally required program ensuring that individuals performing covered tasks on a pipeline are qualified, cited as an area where industry practice is already fairly standardized.
• Integrity management is the systematic process operators use to assess and manage the condition of their pipelines, mentioned as an area where common metrics may be achievable.
• Damage prevention covers practices to prevent excavation and third-party damage to pipelines, another area where Russel believes common metrics could be reached.
• Iron Ring is a ring worn by Canadian engineers as a reminder of their obligation to the public. The tradition is associated with the collapse of the Quebec Bridge. Russel offers it as a model for a certified pipeline professional concept.
• Nightmare Pipeline Failures: Fantasy Planning, Black Swans and Integrity Management is a book by Jan Hayes and Andrew Hopkins that analyzes the 2010 Marshall, Michigan and San Bruno, California pipeline failures using the public record. Russel refers to it as “the Black Swan book.”
• Black swan refers to a rare, high-consequence event that seems unforeseeable beforehand. The book above challenges that framing for pipeline failures.
• Marshall and San Bruno are two major 2010 pipeline incidents: a crude oil release into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River system and a natural gas transmission rupture in a California neighborhood. Both are examined in the book.
• Incentive compensation and safety refers to the idea that how a company structures pay and incentive programs can unintentionally work against safety performance.
• Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Center is a process safety research and education center at Texas A&M that Russel brought in to support a research project.
• Faraday bag is a shielded pouch that blocks wireless signals from phones and other devices, mentioned in jest about holding a fully confidential industry discussion.
• Flowstate is a pipeline leak detection software provider and this episode’s sponsor.

Inside PHMSA Incident Investigations Full Episode Transcript

Announcer: Welcome to the Pipeliners Podcast, episode 463, sponsored by Flowstate, providers of pipeline leak detection software built to remove barriers and empower operators. Flowstate helps teams detect anomalies, reduce false alarms, and improve response with practical tools designed for diverse pipeline operations. Learn more at flowstatesolutions.ai.

The Pipeliners Podcast, where professionals, Bubbas, geeks, and industry insiders share their knowledge and experience about technology, projects, and pipeline operations. And now your host, Russel Treat.

Russel Treat: Thanks for listening to the Pipeliners Podcast. I appreciate you taking the time, and to show that appreciation, we give away a customized YETI tumbler to one listener every episode. This week, our winner is Ariane Gilliam with Atkins Wireless. Congratulations, Ariane, your YETI is on its way. To learn how you can win this prize, stick around until the end of the episode.

This week, we speak to Tiffany Ziemer with the SGA Natural Gas Association about PHMSA incident investigations. Tiffany, so glad to have you here at SGA and get you on the podcast. I’ve really been looking forward to this conversation.

Tiffany Ziemer: Thank you for having me. I am too.

Russel Treat: So if you would, tell the listeners a little bit about yourself and your background. We were talking a little bit about your military experience and so forth. But tell us a little bit about your background, how you got into pipelining, and how you got to your position with SGA.

Tiffany Ziemer: Sure. So back in 2001, so just a couple years ago, I joined the Army and became military police. Got to travel the world. At that time, I’d never even left the state of Minnesota.

Russel Treat: Really?

Tiffany Ziemer: So I got to travel the world, got to travel throughout the country, got a lot of experience. And I was able to spend about fifteen months in the Middle East. When I came back, I was previously going to school to be a police officer, and that didn’t pan out anymore after coming home from a deployment. So I went into the federal government. I started working as a unit administrator for my Army Reserve company. A reserve commander only spends one week a month at the unit, so my job was to act as the commander while he was doing his regular nine-to-five job. And I spent about five, six years doing that.

Then I went over to Homeland Security, and I was doing inspections at facilities that put cargo on aircraft. I did that for about another five to six years. And then I went over to the Department of Homeland Security, I’m sorry, the Department of Transportation, as a PHMSA investigator. I was an investigator for about four years, and then for the last eight years, I became a chief investigator. So I was running eleven Midwest states and a team of investigators when it came to enforcement, compliance, and operations.

Russel Treat: I’m curious, how is incident investigation similar to what you did in the military police? How did that job equip you for accident investigation?

Tiffany Ziemer: So most everything you do, especially as a nineteen, early-twenties kind of kid, everything is a lot more reactive. Everything in the military is a lot more reactive. They train you the best they can to be prepared, and in leadership positions, even at a young age. But everything is reactive, so you’re kind of constantly responding to incidents. Even when we were in Iraq, we spent the first six months running combat missions, and our company of 124 soldiers ran over 500 combat missions in the first six months that we were there.

Russel Treat: Holy smokes. That’s a very high operational rate.

Tiffany Ziemer: Daily. Even at times, a couple of missions a day. There were times where we’d be out on the road sleeping in our trucks for two or three nights at a time. So everything was reactive. You had to work on the fly. You had to figure it out. You had to make safe decisions, not just for yourself, but for your team.

Russel Treat: Yeah, it’s one of the things that I’ve talked about a lot on the podcast over the years, just how any kind of military training, particularly if you’re close to combat or in combat, is going to teach you some very fundamental skills that translate to a lot of other things, particularly for critical infrastructure, because safety… I mean, combat safety is a big deal.

Tiffany Ziemer: Yes, it’s a really big deal.

Russel Treat: It’s the whole story, right?

Tiffany Ziemer: Right. Yeah, it’s very, very true.

Russel Treat: So how’d you end up at SGA?

Tiffany Ziemer: I had met Suzanne at one of her executive conferences. And then about a year later, I came back and gave a speech at her Women’s Leadership conference. Then we stayed in touch and continued talking, and kind of worked out a way that we could work together through my experience with PHMSA in particular.

Russel Treat: Yeah. So tell us, what is your role at SGA? What do you do here?

Tiffany Ziemer: So I’m the Director of Pipeline Safety and Regulatory Excellence. There are a lot of parts of SGA that I hope to be able to support and work within, and an entire regulatory platform that I can build out in a unique way that has never been done before. So working with everything from the members to filling gaps between compliance and industry.

Russel Treat: Interesting. Well, look, I wanted to talk to you about incident investigation. It’s something that I have a particular interest in. I’ve worked with some people that are kind of top-tier investigators. So maybe a way to start the conversation is, what is PHMSA’s role in incident investigations? Because they’re not the NTSB.

Tiffany Ziemer: Right.

Russel Treat: So what is PHMSA’s role in an incident investigation?

Tiffany Ziemer: Well, overall, PHMSA’s objective is going to be to find out what happened, why it happened, and how to prevent it in the future. So they have criteria that’s built out to determine when they deploy, when they follow up, when they track a situation. And overall, they want to go out and serve the safety function to make sure that it doesn’t happen again.

Russel Treat: Yeah. So that’s not really much different than the NTSB. But how are what PHMSA does and what the NTSB does distinct, or different, or collaborative? How does that work?

Tiffany Ziemer: So PHMSA’s role is going to be not only independent, but it is also going to support NTSB’s role as well. Both of them are going to write a report. Oftentimes when the NTSB writes a final report, they may have recommendations that PHMSA follows up on, an action item that they have to take away. Maybe PHMSA ends up doing a safety notice. They work collaboratively, but individually.

Russel Treat: So would it be true to say that PHMSA reaches its own independent conclusion of root cause, and the NTSB does the same thing?

Tiffany Ziemer: They’re not going to differ. They’ll align at the end, but they’re going to write their own reports and have their own root cause.

Russel Treat: Okay. I’m processing what you’re telling me, right? Because basically, you have two organizations doing the same thing. So I guess from my standpoint, that kind of makes sense. PHMSA would have more pipeline expertise, I would guess. Certainly their focus is there. The NTSB has more general accident investigation expertise. It would make sense that those two organizations would kind of do their things independently and then bring that together.

Tiffany Ziemer: Yes.

Russel Treat: So how does that work with regards to communications around incidents? Because one of the things that I think, and this is me speaking, just my opinion, but one of the things I think that we as an industry could do a lot better is get more of the information out sooner.

Tiffany Ziemer: Sure.

Russel Treat: I know that some of the operators have actually asked for the opportunity to distribute findings around incidents, even prior to any publication, just do it confidentially within the industry. But how does that work within the formal process, and what does PHMSA do to try and get that information out to the people that need it quickly?

Tiffany Ziemer: So as soon as a notification comes in, from like the NRC, a media alert, or an operator making a notification that something happened, PHMSA has immediate communication that starts internally in an informal process, and it goes all the way through the end to a formal process. Everything from a Teams chat to email communication that something happened, and the email communication is going all the way up to the Administrator, so the Administrator is getting real-time information. When a deployment is decided and an investigator goes out on site, that communication is coming from the incident command and what’s going on there, and all of that’s being communicated back to headquarters and throughout the chain of command. Then at the end, when a report is written, there’s an investigative report that’s written and put out. And once that’s finalized, that is made public.

Russel Treat: Yeah, I think from those reports… at least, I’ve not read really many PHMSA reports. I’ve read the NTSB. I’m pretty religious about reading all the pipeline-related NTSB reports. And they’ll get a preliminary report out generally within ninety days-ish, sometimes a little longer, sometimes a little less. But the formal reports are often a year or two down the road, and I understand why that is. You’ve got to go through all the details. You’ve got to get all the facts correct. You have to make sure that your factual basis is correct. And then you’ve got to do your analysis around root cause. That just takes what it takes, because it’s an iterative process until you get to what you believe to be the truth.

Tiffany Ziemer: If you have lab analysis or metallurgy reports, those don’t happen overnight. Those take time. They need to get sent off, they need to get tested, sometimes they need to get verified. So there are parts of it that just take longer by nature.

Russel Treat: Right. So given that kind of background and your role in pipeline safety and compliance excellence, what does that mean in terms of what you’re looking to do in your role at SGA? How does that experience and background play into all that?

Tiffany Ziemer: So the hope is, there’s a committee, the pipeline safety committee, that I hope to breathe new life into and kind of bring back up to its feet. There are training elements that I can support and bring a new definition to. There are committees that I can otherwise support. There are gaps between federal and industry. Getting out and meeting our member companies and our associate member companies, filling their gaps, having communication, just being a constant resource.

Russel Treat: Yeah. So I want to throw an idea at you and just get your reaction. We’ve not talked about this at all, so fair warning. I’ve had a notion that we as an industry ought to create, for lack of a better word, what I’m going to call a certified pipeline professional. To my mind, what that would mean is, if I’m a certified pipeline professional, then I have knowledge of the incidents that have occurred and their root causes. Just that education, being certified in that education. I feel like, by the nature of a pipeline incident, they are exceedingly rare. It’s not uncommon that you work your entire career and you’re never anywhere close to one, right? Which says a lot about where we’re at, but we’re not perfect. And when we do have an incident, they tend to have very significant consequences. So I think it would be helpful if we as an industry were all grounded in, here are the things that have gone wrong, and here’s why we do what we do. What do you think about that?

Tiffany Ziemer: It has value. Lessons learned, you can’t not appreciate the value that brings. And if you’re not improving upon it and learning your lessons and sharing them across the board, somebody else is going to make your mistake.

Russel Treat: That’s right. That’s absolutely right.

Tiffany Ziemer: So I see exactly the value. I’ve already sprained my ankle in the pothole. I need to let everybody know there’s a pothole there and put a cone there.

Russel Treat: Right. Exactly. So in Canada, if you get certified as a professional engineer, every professional engineer gets a ring, and it’s made from the steel that was related to a fairly significant bridge failure that occurred, I think, in the thirties. I’d have to go back and do the research. I’ve talked about this before. But basically, every engineer wears that ring to remind them that if you don’t do your job right, bad things happen. So I’ve always thought that it would be kind of cool if you could do something like that. I just offer that maybe that could become something that SGA thinks about as part of what training around SEMs really looks like.

Tiffany Ziemer: That’s a great takeaway. And I know Suzanne’s always wrapping her arms around great ideas.

Russel Treat: Well, if that’s something you guys think that you want to do, I would be really interested in helping with that. I think that’d be something really, really cool. Tell me a bit more about what are some of the other things you think you’ll be doing here at SGA?

Tiffany Ziemer: Well, I look forward to not only meeting with the operators in their own environment, but working with the board of directors, hearing what their regulatory concerns are, understanding where their gaps are, researching what’s coming out from PHMSA, how they can implement it ahead of time, getting their compliance posture started before a rulemaking comes out, understanding what a rulemaking can look like for them, what AI looks like in the future, any preventative/performance maintenance that they can get ahead of.

Russel Treat: Yeah. So in our business, we’re a software company, that’s our core business, and we work a lot in compliance. Of course, anybody who does work in pipeline is going to be involved with compliance. We have a thing we call natural compliance, which means if I write my policies and procedures the right way and I build my systems the right way, then I should just do the work and the records are created, right? So we call that natural compliance, and that’s what we strive to do with our software.

I have a follow-up premise. We really haven’t developed it yet. But the idea would be that compliance is a predicate for safety performance, because compliance does not necessarily mean safety performance. But if I’m not doing compliance, I probably can’t do safety performance, right? So safety performance is whatever your process is: create records, analyze those records, and figure out how to get better. In a nutshell. That’s a great oversimplification, of course, but that’s kind of my thoughts about all that. I think we as an industry are really struggling with, well, what are the metrics we track?

Tiffany Ziemer: And to add to that, I think it’s how do we track it?

Russel Treat: Yeah.

Tiffany Ziemer: And it’s very easy to know all the work that an operator or a company did on the inside. But if they’re not documenting it and showing it over and over, how they did the research, where they collected the data, how they implemented it, why they implemented it that way, what they’re capturing with their new tools, if they’re using AI, if they’re using a drone or augmented reality, if they’re not capturing it and putting it down in writing in a format as to how they’re doing it, then did it happen?

Russel Treat: Well, no. If there is no record, then for all intents and purposes, it didn’t happen, because nobody’s going to give you credit, right? I’m being a little flippant, of course. But the other thing I would say about this topic in particular is, if I go to ten different operators, all ten of those operators are going to be capturing different information about different things in different time frames in different ways.

Tiffany Ziemer: Different ways. Right.

Russel Treat: So one of the things I would argue, and again, I’m trying to put a bug in your ear as the pipeline safety person for SGA, is that we as an industry ought to look at the various areas of operations, and for every major area of operations, we ought to get to three to six KPIs that the whole industry can agree on and all track the same way so that we can benchmark. And then everything else is, do what you need to do for your business.

Tiffany Ziemer: Standardization.

Russel Treat: Yeah. Now, how hard is that to do?

Tiffany Ziemer: Well, you’ve got to think, even in terms of when a regulation is created, it’s got to be strong enough to meet safety, but vague enough to meet every facility, operator, and utility out there. So I wouldn’t say it’s impossible, because I think that there are at least a handful. For example, training records. I think we can come together on what that could possibly look like.

Russel Treat: Yeah, actually, that’s a very good point, because we already kind of have OQ programs, and there’s a lot of that that’s standardized just because there are vendors that have standardized it to make it easier for industry. So yeah, that makes sense.

Tiffany Ziemer: So I think three to six is an optimal goal. You could get there probably relatively easily, but there’s a lot more that will have further and further gaps between how you can make them standardized across the board.

Russel Treat: Well, I think you could probably get there in integrity. You could probably get there in damage prevention, because there’s just been so much work around risk management in those areas. I think the issue would be getting the industry to agree, of all the things that we do track, what are the three or the six that we all want to track together the same way. That to me would be really challenging.

Tiffany Ziemer: Not impossible.

Russel Treat: Not impossible, but challenging.

Tiffany Ziemer: But also, if you have some of the larger companies that can come together and create open dialogue on how they’re doing it, it’s going to have a more powerful effect across the board to get to those that don’t know what they don’t know.

Russel Treat: Right. That’s right. And there are certainly, of the industry, probably a good twenty to thirty percent of early adopters that are pretty far down that line at this point, especially with AI.

Tiffany Ziemer: Yeah. Oh, yeah.

Russel Treat: It’s getting easier with AI to just capture and look at that information and try to figure out what matters and such. I also think that if we’re going to do that, we need to do it in the areas that are beyond what we classically think about. So cyber…

Tiffany Ziemer: Sure.

Russel Treat: HR and compensation. There are safety components to those issues as well, particularly around HR and compensation. Because if I build my compensation, particularly my incentive program, I can actually de-optimize safety without intending to do that.

Tiffany Ziemer: Sure.

Russel Treat: Right. So I did a really interesting podcast. There’s a book, and we’ll have to link it up, because I’m pointing at Greg right now. He’s the gentleman behind the camera making us sound good and look good. But there’s a book that I call the Black Swan book. It’s basically about black swans and pipeline incidents, and it’s written by a couple of PhD engineers. One is a PhD in engineering and social sciences. And they looked at Bellingham… not Bellingham. They looked at Marshall, and they looked at San Bruno, just the public record, and wrote a whole book and did analysis about the safety programs. Fascinating work. And I’ve had one of the two authors of the book on the podcast and talked about all that. Really, really interesting. But they did a correlation between HR programs and compensation incentive programs and how that impacts safety. Some really interesting content there. There are things, I think, that we have not historically thought about as being pipeline safety that organizations like SGA, with some creativity, might be able to help the industry move the needle on.

Tiffany Ziemer: Yeah. I think it’s awesome. Now I’m going to have to read this book.

Russel Treat: I highly recommend it. I’ve read it like three times. I have it at the house. It’s all covered with markups and tattered pages, because I didn’t just read it, I tried to digest it. It’s really fascinating. And I’ll send you the links. We’ll put it in the podcast notes, so you can listen to those as well. Because it’s one thing to read a book. It’s another thing to talk to the author.

Tiffany Ziemer: Sure.

Russel Treat: So anyways, anything else in terms of initiatives around SGA, in terms of your role and where you’d like to head?

Tiffany Ziemer: I learn more… I’m getting accustomed to industry versus government ways. So as I learn more, I want to be a part of more. I want to see more. I want to understand more. I want to get involved more.

Russel Treat: So what’s the primary difference you’ve seen so far between industry… well, you’re really not in industry. You’re in an association. It’s not quite the same thing.

Tiffany Ziemer: Getting there.

Russel Treat: Right. But you’re moving towards industry. Government, association, then maybe industry later, who knows. But what’s the primary thing you notice is a difference?

Tiffany Ziemer: In the government, it’s much more rigid. There are formalities. There are ways in which business is done. You get a lot more flexibility once you get outside the government. You get the openness to communicate more, to communicate in different ways, to be a part of something that you otherwise can’t be a part of. Be on a podcast.

Russel Treat: Yes. I could actually have a whole sidebar conversation about that right now.

Tiffany Ziemer: Yeah. I mean, PHMSA even has an entire governmental affairs team, so all of that communication either gets approved through them or goes through them. So it’s just understanding where the lines change to.

Russel Treat: Yeah, I think the roles are different. I have a great deal of admiration for PHMSA and the work it does. There are a lot of very, very talented engineers and professionals, and they choose to work there because they believe they’re making a difference, versus working in industry where they could probably have higher compensation and a different kind of grief and aggravation. I won’t say it wouldn’t have any, but they’d just have a different kind. But you have to realize PHMSA is not just working with industry. They’re also working with all the stakeholders, so all the first responders and the public. They have to arbitrate all of that. And they’re not politicians, they’re part of the administration, the administrative branch. So in all of their communication, they have to speak factually, but through filters. And they have to speak factually to multiple stakeholders with often very different interests in terms of outcomes and such.

Tiffany Ziemer: And you might have the same message to everybody, but you’ve got to package it differently for your audience and how it matters to them. So if you’re trying to talk to an emergency responder versus a large operator, you might be communicating the same thing, but you’ve got to make it matter to them so that they are invested in it.

Russel Treat: Yeah, exactly. You’ve got to put it into their language and culture and interest.

Tiffany Ziemer: And I think a lot of people might not understand how, even though PHMSA is small, operating with around six hundred people, how much they do outside of rulemakings or inspections and enforcement or accident investigations. There are chemists, there are economists, there are engineers, there are special permits, there’s research and development.

Russel Treat: Yes.

Tiffany Ziemer: Right? The list goes on and on of what their capabilities are, and they are some of the most brilliant minds that I’ve ever met.

Russel Treat: Yeah, you’ve got some really… particularly when you start kind of getting behind the curtain and you start talking to the engineers and the scientists and the metallurgists and the folks that are really deeply involved with the R&D projects, and are working with those people and kind of overseeing the creation of the research materials. I’m actually in the middle of that right now with a project we did, and I’m very glad I brought in the Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Center to support the effort, because it’s clear now that it was over my head. So I’ve learned a lot. But yeah, it does a lot of really cool stuff, and so does SGA. I’m really excited that you’ve joined the team. I think you’re in a very interesting role. I think you have lots of opportunity to do something new and different and leverage all the years of capabilities, particularly around training and so forth.

Tiffany Ziemer: So the page isn’t blank now for what it can become, but it’s getting written, right? And we’re doing it as a team.

Russel Treat: Yeah. So that’s got to be fun.

Tiffany Ziemer: With input, and being able to put all those creative thoughts together, I’m really looking forward to that and working with the SGA leadership. I’m really excited about it. I get motivated just in our morning meetings.

Russel Treat: Well, I will tell you that I’ve been involved with SGA off and on for many, many, many years. I think that Suzanne and her team have really been doing a great job of revitalizing and kind of honoring… it’s very difficult when you come into an organization that has as much history and has had as much industry impact as something like AGA or SGA, and you want to revitalize it, because you’ve got to honor the past, but you’ve got to embrace the future. And that is challenging from a leadership and strategy standpoint. But I think SGA is doing a great job, and I think they did a great job to hire you. I think you’re going to bring some new talent and energy to all of this. I’ll be very excited to see where that goes.

Tiffany Ziemer: Thank you. And I must say, if not for Suzanne and Cindy and her leadership team… I had a pretty incredible job as the chief investigator with PHMSA, so it would take quite a draw to get me to leave that. And they’ve done that. They’ve incentivized me in opening the door for me.

Russel Treat: So you were the senior investigator at PHMSA?

Tiffany Ziemer: The chief investigator.

Russel Treat: Chief. Wow.

Tiffany Ziemer: Supervisory.

Russel Treat: Oh, man. You probably can’t do this, but I would love to just get a podcast and talk about all the incidents that you investigated and what that process looked like and what you found out.

Tiffany Ziemer: How it can be, in theory, the same thing, but different every single time.

Russel Treat: Yeah. No, I’ve done enough of that to know it’s a challenge with the industry, because a lot of that stuff has to be done in confidence. The confidentiality is really critical. But gosh, it’d be great to just be able to close the doors, and nothing goes out of this room, and get all the people that have that experience to come in and talk together.

Tiffany Ziemer: Get your cell phone out, sign in.

Russel Treat: Right. Put your cell phone in a Faraday bag.

Tiffany Ziemer: Yeah, exactly.

Russel Treat: Exactly. All right, well, look, thanks so much for coming on and talking with us.

Tiffany Ziemer: A pleasure.

Russel Treat: All the best for your future at SGA, and looking forward to seeing you doing great things.

Tiffany Ziemer: Thank you.

Russel Treat: I hope you enjoyed this week’s episode of the Pipeliners Podcast and our conversation with Tiffany. Just a reminder, before you go, you should register to win our customized Pipeliners Podcast YETI tumbler. Simply visit pipelinepodcastnetwork.com/win and enter yourself in the drawing. If you have ideas, questions, or topics you’d be interested in, or if you’d like to be a guest, please let me know on the Contact Us page at pipelinepodcastnetwork.com or reach out to me on LinkedIn. Thanks for listening. I’ll talk to you next week.