{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120101004","title":"ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP) — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2010-08-10","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.603(b), 192.605(a), 192.709(c), 192.736(b)(1), 192.739(a), 192.745(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120101004.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120101004.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120101004","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120101004","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP). PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.603(b),  192.605(a),  192.709(c),  192.736(b)(1),  192.739(a),  192.745(a). The case was opened on 2010-08-10 and is reported as closed as of 2011-01-24. Proposed civil penalty: $85,700. Assessed civil penalty: $85,700. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120101004_FinalOrder_01242011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120101004/120101004_FinalOrder_01242011.pdf\n\n120101004_FinalOrder_01242011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120101004/120101004_FinalOrder_01242011_text.pdf\n\n120101004_NOPV  PCP_08102010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120101004/120101004_NOPV%20%20PCP_08102010.pdf\n\n120101004_NOPV PCP_08102010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120101004/120101004_NOPV%20PCP_08102010_text.pdf\n\n120101004_Operator Response to Notice Letter_09212010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120101004/120101004_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice%20Letter_09212010.pdf\n\n120101004_FinalOrder_01242011_text.pdf\n\nJAN 24, 2011\nMr. Thomas Wooden\nVice President\nNortheast Transmission\nAlgonquin Gas Transmission LLC\n890 Winter Street, Suite 300\nWaltham, MA 02451\nRe: CPF No. 1-2010-1004\nDear Mr. Wooden:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $85,700. This letter acknowledges receipt of the full\npenalty amount, by wire transfer, dated September 9, 2010. This enforcement action is now\nclosed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,\nor 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\nEnclosure\ncc: Byron Coy, P.E., Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7005 1160 0001 0040 0061]\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n____________________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nAlgonquin Gas Transmission LLC, ) CPF No. 1-2010-1004\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nIn October 2007 and October 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the\nConnecticut Department of Public Utility Control, as agent for the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-\nsite pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Algonquin Gas Transmission LLC\n(Algonquin or Respondent) in Cromwell, Connecticut. Algonquin operates 1,120 miles of\npipeline throughout the Northeast and is owned and operated by Spectra Energy Transmission,\nLLC.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated August 10, 2010, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty\n(Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Algonquin\nhad committed various violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 192 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of\n$85,700 for the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed finding that Respondent had\ncommitted certain other probable violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 192 and warned the company to\ntake appropriate corrective action or be subject to future enforcement action.\nAlgonquin responded to the Notice by letter dated September 21, 2010 (Response). The\ncompany did not contest the allegations of violation and paid the proposed civil penalty of\n$85,700 as provided in 49 C.F.R. § 190.227. Payment of the penalty serves to close the case\nwith prejudice to Respondent.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Algonquin did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.\nPart 192, as follows:\n1 http://www.spectraenergy.com/what_we_do/businesses/us/assets/algonquin/ (last accessed on December 20, 2010).\n\n\n\n2\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a), which states in\nrelevant part:\n§ 192.605--Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and\nemergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each\npipeline, a manual of written procedures for conducting operations and\nmaintenance activities and for emergency response. For transmission\nlines, the manual must also include procedures for handling abnormal\noperations. This manual must be reviewed and updated by the operator at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year.\nThis manual must be prepared before operations of a pipeline system\ncommence. Appropriate parts of the manual must be kept at locations\nwhere operations and maintenance activities are conducted.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a) by failing to follow its own\nmanual of written procedures for completing work permit forms. Specifically, the Notice alleged\nthat Algonquin personnel failed to complete work permit forms prior to commencing hot work\nper company procedures.\nstation were either missing a supervisor’s signature, had missing fields for work type and job\nlocation, or were otherwise incomplete. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation.\nAccordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49\nC.F.R. § 192.605(a) by failing to follow its own procedures for completing work permit forms.\n2 Several of Algonquin’s permit forms at the Cromwell Compressor\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.736(b), which states, in\nrelevant part:\n§ 192.736 – Compressor stations: Gas detection.\n(a) . . .\n(b) Except when shutdown of the system is necessary for maintenance\nunder paragraph (c) of this section, each gas detection and alarm system\nrequired by this section must---\n(1) Continuously monitor the compressor building for a concentration\nof gas in air of not more than 25 percent of the lower explosive limit….\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.736 by failing to continuously\nmonitor the Cromwell compressor station for a concentration of gas in air of not more than 25%\nof the lower explosive limit (LEL). Specifically, the Notice alleged that in February 2008,\nAugust 2008, and March 2009, the gas detector alarm setting for 21 detectors was set at 30%\nwhich is higher than the percentage permissible under the pipeline safety regulations. This\npercentage is also higher than the amount permitted by the operator’s own procedures (20%).3\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\n2 Spectra Energy Transmission SOP procedure # 5-8010, January 1, 2007, pages 1-5.\n3 Spectra Energy Transmission SOP procedure # 4-3030, “Stationary Gas and Fire Detection Systems”, June 5,\n2009, page 4.\n\n\n\n3\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.736(b) by failing to\ncontinuously monitor the Cromwell compressor station for a concentration of gas in air of not\nmore than 25 percent of the lower explosive limit.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 3, 4, 5, and 6, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 192 but did\nnot propose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered\nto be warning items. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.603 (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to keep records to\nadminister the procedures established under § 192.605. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged that Algonquin failed to keep a set of drawings at the Cromwell\ncompressor station current. Valve 202 was incorrectly labeled on the control\nroom map. In addition, Valves 207 and 208 were still located on the control room\nmap even though the valves had been removed after a vessel project in 2004; and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.745 (Item 4) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to inspect\ntransmission line valves that might be required during an emergency, at required\nintervals. Specifically, the Notice alleged that between 2004-2005, Algonquin\nfailed to inspect valves 1239A, 215A, 215B, 215C, 215D, 28A, and 202 at least\nonce each calendar year, but not to exceed 15 months; and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.709 (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to retain records of\ninternal corrosion inspections or valve inspections for five years. Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that Algonquin could not produce records of internal corrosion\ninspections connected with the 2005 E-system dent removal project or records for\n10 valve inspections occurring in 2008; and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.739 (Item 6) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to inspect pressure\nregulating stations at intervals not exceeding 15 months. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged that Algonquin failed to inspect regulator station No. 82 once each\ncalendar year, at intervals not exceeding 15 months. Algonquin inspected this\nregulator station on March 1, 2007, and again on August 20, 2008, exceeding the\nmandatory time period. In addition, Respondent inspected regulator station\nNo. 50 on May 22, 2008, and again on October 12, 2009, again exceeding the\nrequired interval.\nAlgonquin presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to\naddress the cited items. Accordingly, having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49\nC.F.R. § 190.205, that probable violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.603 (Notice Item 3), 192.745\n(Notice Item 4), 192.709 (Notice Item 5) and 192.739 (Notice Item 6) have occurred and\nRespondent is hereby advised to correct such conditions. In the event that OPS finds a violation\nof any of these items in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to future\nenforcement action.\n\n\n\n4\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; the Respondent’s\nability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing\nbusiness; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without\nany reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $85,700 for the violations cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $20,700 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.605, for failing to follow its manual of written procedures for completing work permit\nforms. Algonquin did not contest the allegation but stated that it had undertaken remedial\nmeasures to ensure that its personnel were properly trained. However, at the time of the\ninspection, Algonquin did not follow its procedures and although this violation did not contribute\nto an accident or incident, there were five instances of violations. Algonquin’s procedures\nrequired a completed work permit form prior to commencing a hot work event. The operator\nwas aware of the requirements in its procedures and yet failed to ensure that the permit forms\nwere complete. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment\ncriteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $20,700 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.605.\nItem 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $65,000 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.736(b), for failing to continuously monitor the Cromwell compressor station for a\nconcentration of gas in air of not more than 25% of the LEL. Monitoring the concentration of\ngas in air is particularly critical to the safety of Algonquin’s employees and members of the\npublic near the facility. Certainly, the operator was aware of this requirement and its own\nprocedures required a concentration of gas in air of not more than 20%. However, the operator\npermitted the gas alarms for 21 detectors at this facility to be set at 30% during February 2008,\nAugust 2008, and March 2009. Algonquin did not contest the allegation but stated that upon\nfurther review, it was determined that the gas detectors were calibrated correctly. According to\nthe operator, the company complied with the regulation but maintained incorrect documentation.\nHowever, Algonquin could not produce paperwork to confirm that the concentration of gas in air\ndid not exceed 25% throughout 2008. In fact, Algonquin stated that “there is not documentation\nfor 2008 as there were no program changes made between the 2007 and 2009 versions.”4\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $65,000 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.736(b).\nTherefore, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $85,700 which Respondent has already\nremitted to PHMSA.\n4 Response at 4.\n\n\n\n5\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":13652}