COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC — Warning Letter

party submissionOfficial PDF120111003W_Operator Response_to_WL_04132011.pdf#

120111003W_Warning Letter_03222011_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFU.S. Department 820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103 Of Transportation West Trenton, NJ 08628 Pipeline and 609.989.2171 Hazardous Materials Safety Administration WARNING LETTER OVERNIGHT EXPRESS MAIL March 22, 2011 Mr. Victor Gaglio Sr. Vice President of Operations & Engineering NiSource Gas Transmission & Storage 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE Charleston, WV 25314 CPF 1-2011-1003W Dear Mr. Victor Gaglio: From September 21 through 24, 2009, representatives of New York Public Service Commission (NY PSC) acting as agent for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code inspected Columbia Gas Transmission Corp’s facility (CGT), which is a subsidiary of NiSource Gas Transmission & Storage, in Binghamton, New York. As a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the probable violation(s) are: 1. §192.707 Line markers for mains and transmission lines. (c) Pipelines aboveground. Line markers must be placed and maintained along each section of a main and transmission line that is located above ground in an area accessible to the public. CGT did not have line markers placed along each section of a main and transmission line that is located above ground in an area accessible to the public. As ascertained by a site visit at Westover Station, fenced off assets and multiple buildings were not physically controlled by the operator, therefore the area may be entered without difficulty. At the time of the inspection, CGT did not have line markers at Westover Station. Furthermore,#

120111003W_Warning Letter_03222011_text.pdf, page 2CPF 1-2011-1003W at the Corning Compressor Station, it was revealed that the existing Corning Compressor Station facility had doubled in size with the addition of the Binghamton Pipeline Compressor Unit. This compressor unit was added as a separate unit within the facility at this site. The area had undergone a massive re-sizing and re-grading change. However, the enlargement of the facility was not demarcated with markers or placards containing required information. CGT must place line marker where aboveground pipeline are accessible to the public and necessary to reduce the possibility of damage or interference. 2. §192.751 Prevention of accidental ignition. Each operator shall take steps to minimize the danger of accidental ignition of gas in any structure or area where the presence of gas constitutes a hazard of fire or explosion, including the following: (c) Post warning signs, where appropriate. CGT did not have warning signs where appropriate. At the time of the inspection, warning signs were ready for installment but were not posted to cause awareness for prevention of accidental ignition at the Westover Station. CGT must post warning signs. Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the item(s) identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in CGT being subject to additional enforcement action. No reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, please address your correspondence to Byron Coy, PE, Director, PHMSA Eastern Region, 820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103, West Trenton, NJ 08628 and refer to CPF 1-2011-1003W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your 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 you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). Sincerely, Bryon Coy, PE Director, Eastern Region Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 120111003W_Warning Letter_03222011 Page 2 of 3#