{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120100001","title":"RICHMOND, CITY OF — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2010-05-06","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.285(c)(1), 192.303, 192.375(a)(2)(i).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120100001.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120100001.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120100001","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120100001","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving RICHMOND, CITY OF. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.285(c)(1),  192.303,  192.375(a)(2)(i). The case was opened on 2010-05-06 and is reported as closed as of 2013-03-14. Proposed civil penalty: $49,700. Assessed civil penalty: $0. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120100001_Closure Letter_03142013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_Closure%20Letter_03142013.pdf\n\n120100001_Closure letter_03142013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_Closure%20letter_03142013_text.pdf\n\n120100001_Consent Agreement Order_02052013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_Consent%20Agreement%20Order_02052013.pdf\n\n120100001_Consent Agreement Order_02052013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_Consent%20Agreement%20Order_02052013_text.pdf\n\n120100001_NOPV PCP_05062010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_NOPV%20PCP_05062010.pdf\n\n120100001_NOPV PCP_05062010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_NOPV%20PCP_05062010_text.pdf\n\n120100001_Operator Response to Notice and Request for Hearing_06022010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120100001/120100001_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice%20and%20Request%20for%20Hearing_06022010.pdf\n\n120100001_Consent Agreement Order_02052013_text.pdf\n\nMr. David B. Kearney\nAssistant City Attorney\nCity of Richmond\n900 East Broad Street, Suite 300\nRichmond, VA 23219\nRE: In the Matter of City of Richmond – CPF No. 1-2010-0001\nDear Mr. Kearney:\nEnclosed is a copy of the Consent Agreement and Order including a copy of the Notice of\nProbable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty, which was erroneously omitted. The service of\nthis Consent Agreement and Order was previously deemed effective.\nThank you for your cooperation.\nSincerely,\nJames M. Pates, Esq.\nAssistant Chief Counsel\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n\n\n2\nFEBRUARY 5, 2013\nMr. David B. Kearney\nAssistant City Attorney\nCity of Richmond\n900 East Broad Street, Suite 300\nRichmond, VA 23219\nRE: In the Matter of City of Richmond – CPF No. 1-2010-0001\nDear Mr. Kearney:\nEnclosed please find a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement reached\nbetween PHMSA and the City of Richmond in this enforcement action and that you signed on\nJanuary 18, 2013. Service of the Consent Order and Consent Agreement by certified mail is\ndeemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Byron Coy, Director, Eastern Region, OPS\nMr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, Pipeline\nSafety, OPS\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, DC 20590\n_________________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nCity of Richmond, Virginia, )\na municipal corporation, ) CPF No. 1-2010-0001\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n_________________________________________ )\nCONSENT AGREEMENT AND ORDER\nBy letter dated May 6, 2010, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n(PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), issued a Notice of Proposed Violation in this\nproceeding, which arose out of an on-site inspection of the pipeline facilities of the City of\nRichmond’s (City or Respondent) gas distribution facilities in Richmond, Virginia. The City\noperates a municipal gas distribution system consisting of approximately 1,700 miles of gas\ndistribution lines.\n1 The inspection was conducted on March 26-27, 2009, pursuant to chapter\n601 of Title 49, United States Code, by a Virginia State Corporation Commission (VA SCC)\ninspector, acting as agent for OPS.\nAs a result of the VA SCC inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated May 6, 2010, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil\nPenalty (Notice), a copy of which is attached hereto as Appendix One. In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent had violated 49 C.F.R. Part\n192 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $49,700 for the alleged violation. The Notice also\nproposed finding that Respondent had committed two other probable violations of 49 C.F.R. Part\n192 and warning the City to take appropriate corrective action or be subject to future\nenforcement action.\nThe City responded to the Notice by letter dated June 2, 2010, and requested a hearing to contest\nthe alleged violation and proposed penalty and to present evidence regarding its good-faith\ncompliance efforts. A hearing was subsequently held on August 26, 2010, in Washington, D.C.,\nwith an attorney from the Office of Chief Counsel, PHMSA, presiding. At the hearing,\nRespondent was represented by counsel. After the hearing, the City provided a post-hearing\nstatement for the record, by letter dated September 15, 2010.\n1 http://www.richmondgov.com/ (last accessed 6/7/2011).\n\n\n\n2\nFollowing the hearing, the parties entered into good-faith discussions to resolve the issues\npresented and have reached agreement that it would be in the best interests of the parties,\npursuant to 49 C.F.R. Part 190, to resolve this enforcement action without further proceedings\nand to enter into this Consent Agreement and Order (Agreement), without adjudication of any\nissue of fact or law.\nNOW, THEREFORE, upon consent and agreement of Respondent and PHMSA (collectively,\nParties), the Parties agree as follows:\nI. General Provisions\n1. Respondent acknowledges that the City and its pipeline system are subject to the\njurisdiction of the federal Pipeline Safety Laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations\nand administrative orders issued thereunder. For purposes of this Agreement, Respondent\nacknowledges that it received proper notice of PHMSA’s actions in this proceeding and that the\nNotice states claims upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq.,\nand the regulations and orders issued thereunder.\n2. Respondent consents to the issuance of the Agreement, and hereby waives any\nfurther procedural requirements with respect to its issuance. Respondent waives all rights to\ncontest the adequacy of notice or the validity of this Agreement, including all rights to\nadministrative or judicial hearings or appeals.\n3. This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon the Parties and their\nrespective officers, directors, and employees, and to Respondent’s successors, assigns, or other\nentities or persons otherwise bound by law. The City agrees to provide a copy of this Agreement\nand any incorporated work plans and schedules to all of its officers, employees, and agents\nwhose duties might reasonably include compliance with its terms.\n.\n4. The Parties agree that Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegation of\nviolation in the Notice, but admits, for purposes of this Agreement, the facts as stated in the\nNotice. This Agreement does not constitute a finding of violation of any Federal law or\nregulation and may not be used in any civil proceeding of any kind as evidence or proof of any\nfact, fault or liability, or as evidence of the violation of any law, rule, regulation or requirement,\nexcept in a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this Agreement.\n5. This Agreement does not waive or modify any Federal, State, or local law or\nregulation applicable to Respondent’s pipeline systems. This Agreement is not a permit, or a\nmodification or any permit, under any Federal, State, or local law or regulation. Respondent\nremains responsible for achieving and maintaining compliance with all applicable Federal, State,\nand local laws, regulations, and permits.\n6. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and 49 C.F.R. § 190.221, Respondent’s\nfailure to comply with this Agreement may result in the assessment of civil penalties up to\n$200,000 per violation per day, or in referral of the case for judicial enforcement.\n\n\n\n3\nII. Compliance Terms\n7. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the City, prior to 2009, engaged in the\npractice of installing prospective gas distribution service lines, referred to locally as “bond\nissues,” in areas of new development. These incomplete plastic pipeline stubs were installed so\nthat street paving could be completed without further cutting of the pavement. Gas lines were\nsubsequently tied in, as new buildings were erected. Pursuant to this practice, the City would\ninstall a new main, with service taps, excess flow valves, and stubbed bond issues ending in\npurge points. The City would simultaneously pressure test the mains and the bond issues, after\nopening the curb valves and closing the purge points. Next, the curb valves would be closed,\nresidual gas in the bond issue stub released, and the purge points capped. These air-filled lines\nwere then brought above ground. Upon construction of an actual building, the City would\ncomplete the service by excavating the bond issue, cutting it below ground, and tying it into the\ncompleted portion of the service line to the building.\n8. The Parties agree that the practice described in Paragraph 7 above constitutes a\nthreat to public safety because it allows gas lines that have been installed but not yet connected\nto customers to be inadvertently connected to gas service and left above ground and unprotected\nfrom deterioration and external damage.\n9. The City represents that it has discontinued the practice described in Paragraph 7\nabove and has used its best efforts to replace or correct any plastic pipe “bond issues” where\nsuch connections were located above ground and unprotected from deterioration and external\ndamage. The City further represents that all existing bond issues have been buried or otherwise\nprotected against deterioration and external damage, which has been verified by the VA SCC.\n10. Respondent further agrees, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, to cease\nand desist permanently from the practices described in Paragraph 7 above.\n11. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the warning items set forth in Items 2 and\n3 of the Notice shall remain in full force and effect. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.303 (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to construct each\ntransmission line or main in accordance with comprehensive written\nspecifications or standards consistent with 49 C.F.R. Part 192; and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.285 (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to re-qualify two\nindividuals making plastic pipe points under an applicable procedure.\nIf the VA SCC or PHMSA finds a violation of either of these Items in a subsequent inspection,\nRespondent may be subject to future enforcement action.\nIII. Penalties\n12. PHMSA hereby withdraws the proposed civil penalty of $49,700 for the alleged\nviolation of Item 1 in the Notice.\n\n\n\n4\n.\n13. If the City fails to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement, the City will be\nliable for stipulated penalties, according to the following provisions:\na. The City will pay a stipulated penalty to the United States in the amount of the\noriginal proposed civil penalty of $49,700; and\nb. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as prohibiting, altering or otherwise\nlimiting the ability of PHMSA to seek any other remedies or sanctions available to\nthe agency by virtue of the City’s violation of this Agreement or of any statutes and\nregulations upon which it is based, or any other applicable provision of law.\nIV. Miscellaneous\n14. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties and supersedes all\nprior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, negotiations and discussions between\nthe Parties, whether oral or written, with respect to the subject matter herein. The terms of this\nAgreement shall control in the event of any inconsistency with the record in this proceeding.\n15. In the event of any transfer of ownership or operating responsibility of any portion\nof the City’s pipeline system during the term of this Agreement, the City will provide a copy of\nthis Agreement to the prospective transferee at least 30 days prior to such transfer and\nsimultaneously provide written notice of the prospective transfer to the Director.\n16. This Agreement does not create rights in, or grant any cause of action to, any third\nparty not party to this Agreement. PHMSA is not liable for any injuries or damages to persons\nor property arising from acts or omissions of Respondent or its officers, employees, or agents\ncarrying out any actions required by this Agreement.\n17. Respondent may request written confirmation from PHMSA when this Agreement\nis terminated. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement may be modified only by the\nmutual agreement of the Parties and set forth in writing and signed by both Parties.\n18. Each undersigned representative of the Parties certifies that he is fully authorized\nby the party represented to enter into the terms and conditions hereof and to execute and legally\nbind that party to it.\n19. The Effective Date of this Agreement is the date on which this Agreement is signed\nby both Respondent and PHMSA.\n\n\n\n5\nThe Parties hereby agree to all conditions and terms of this Agreement:\nFor PHMSA: For Respondent:\n___________________________ __________________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety Operations,\nChristopher L. Beschler\nDeputy Chief Administrative Officer for\nCity of Richmond, Virginia\n____________________________ __________________________________\nDate Date\n\n\n\n6\nAPPENDIX ONE\n[INSERT COPY OF NOTICE]\n\n\n\nU.S. Department Of Transportation Pipeline and 609.989.2171\nHazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 306\nWest Trenton, NJ 08628\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nand\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nEXPRESS OVERNIGHT MAIL\nMay 06, 2010\nMr. Christopher L. Beschler\nDirector Department of Public Utilities\nDeputy Chief Administrative Officer\nCity of Richmond\nDepartment of Public Utilities\n730 East Broad Street, 6th Floor\nRichmond, VA 23219\nCPF 1-2010-0001\nDear Mr. Beschler:\nBetween March 26 and May 27, 2009, a State Inspector from the Virginia State Corporation\nCommission (VA SCC), acting as Agent for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, inspected your\npipeline facilities in Richmond, VA.\nAs a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the\nprobable violations are:\n\n\n\n1. §192.375 Service lines: Plastic.\n(a) Each plastic service line outside a building must be installed below ground\nlevel, except that –\n(2) It may terminate above ground level and outside the building, if-\n(i) The above ground level part of the plastic service line is protected against\ndeterioration and external damage;\nThe City of Richmond (City) failed to install a plastic service line in a manner to protect the\nabove ground level part of the plastic service line from deterioration and external damage at lots\n20 & 21 on Ginter Street in Henrico County, Virginia.\nOn March 26, 2009, the VA SCC inspector performed a site visit on Ginter Street in Henrico\nCounty and found two \"stubbed up\" plastic gas services located above ground on lots 20 & 21.\nTwo City representatives arrived at the site and confirmed that both of the above ground plastic\nservice stubs were pressurized with natural gas.\nThe VA SCC inspector took photographs during the site visit, and observed the condition of the\nservice stubs.\n2. §192.303 Compliance with specifications or standards.\nEach transmission line or main must be constructed in accordance with\ncomprehensive written specifications or standards that are consistent with this part.\nOn April 28, 2009, the VA SCC inspector observed a City contractor failing to use a weak link\n(as required by City O&M procedure Volume II, Chapter 3, Section II), while in the process of\npulling 2 inch plastic pipe through a directionally drilled bore hole. The City contractor was\nconstructing a gas main on Cottrell Road in Henrico County, VA. The VA SCC inspector\nimmediately notified City representatives of this finding. The subject section of plastic pipe was\nremoved. The following day a new section of plastic pipe was installed using the required weak\nlink in the pulling process.\nThe VA SCC inspector took photographs during the site visit, and observed the condition of the\nplastic pipe installation process. The VA SCC inspector also witnessed the new installation on\nApril 29, 2009.\n\n\n\n3. §192.285 Plastic pipe: Qualifying persons to make joints.\n(c) A person must be requalified under an applicable procedure, if during any\n12-month period that person:\n(1) Does not make any joints under that procedure; or\nOn May 9, 2009, the VA SCC inspector observed a City contractor using two unqualified\nindividuals to install mechanical joints on plastic pipe. The contractor crew was working at 133\nBelt Blvd, in the City of Richmond on that date. The unqualified individuals’ joining cards had\nexpired as of September 18 and 19, 2008, respectively. These findings were brought to the\nattention of City representatives, and the fittings were promptly removed and re-installed by a\nqualified individual.\nThe VA SCC inspector took photographs during the site visit, and checked the qualification\ncards of the individuals installing the mechanical joints.\nProposed Civil Penalty\nUnder 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000\nfor each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the circumstances and\nsupporting documentation involved in the above probable violations and has recommended that\nyou be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $49,700 as follows:\nItem number PENALTY\n1 $49,700\nWarning Items\nWith respect to items 2 and 3, we have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents\ninvolved in this case and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty\nassessment proceedings at this time.\nResponse to this Notice\nEnclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators\nin Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be\nadvised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being\nmade publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for\nconfidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you\nmust provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for\n\n\n\nconfidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information\nqualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days\nof receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this\nNotice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in\nthis Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order.\nIn all your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 1-2010-0001 and for each\ndocument you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\nSincerely,\nByron E. Coy, PE\nDirector, Eastern\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nEnclosure: Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings\ncc: Jim Hotinger, VA SCC\n\n120100001_Closure letter_03142013_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and 609.989.2171\nHazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103\nWest Trenton, NJ 08628\nEXPRESS OVERNIGHT MAIL\nMarch 14, 2013\nRobert Steidel, Director\nCity of Richmond, DPU\n730 East Broad Street\nRichmond, VA 23219\nCPF 1-2010-0001\nDear Mr. Steidel:\nOn February 5, 2013, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), issued to the City of Richmond, Virginia (City), a municipal\ncorporation, a Consent Order (Order) in the above-referenced case. This Order incorporated the\nterms of a Consent Agreement signed by both PHMSA and the City. This Consent Agreement\nresulted from a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty (Notice) that was issued\nto the City on May 6, 2010.\nUnder the terms of this Consent Agreement and Order, the City agreed to cease and desist from\nthe practice described therein. Therefore, the City will not engage in that practice in the future.\nAccordingly, we determined that there are no further actions needed in this case and this case is\nnow closed.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nByron E. Coy, PE\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nCc: VA SCC","truncated":false,"body_characters":21224}