{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120131023W","title":"GRANITE STATE GAS TRANSMISSION INC — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2013-11-13","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 192.616(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120131023w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120131023w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120131023w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120131023W","body":"Warning Letter involving GRANITE STATE GAS TRANSMISSION INC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.616(c). The case was opened on 2013-11-13 and is reported as closed as of 2013-11-13. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120131023W_Warning Letter_11132013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120131023W/120131023W_Warning%20Letter_11132013.pdf\n\n120131023W_Warning Letter_11132013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120131023W/120131023W_Warning%20Letter_11132013_text.pdf\n\n120131023W_Warning Letter_11132013_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\nWARNING LETTER\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS MAIL\nNovember 13, 2013\nMr. Thomas Meissner, SVP & COO\nGranite State Gas Transmission, Inc.\n6 Liberty Lane\nHampton, NH 03842\nCPF 1-2013-1023W\nDear Mr. Meissner:\nFrom August 9 to August 11, 2011, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States\nCode inspected Granite State Transmission, Inc.’s (Granite State) Public Awareness Program titled\nRegional Public Awareness and Education Program for Gas Distribution and Transmission Pipelines,\nRevision B, April 2011(Public Awareness and Education Program), in Hampton, New Hampshire.\nAs a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the Pipeline Safety\nRegulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the probable violations are:\n1. §192.616 Public awareness.\n(a) …\n(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations, including baseline\nand supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless the operator provides justification\nin its program or procedural manual as to why compliance with all or certain provisions of\nthe recommended practice is not practicable and not necessary for safety.\nGranite State failed to follow the general program recommendation, including baseline and supplement\nrequirements in Section 2.8 of API RP 1162 because it did not mail a baseline message to excavators in\n2010.\nPursuant to Table 2-2 in Section 2.8 of API RP 1162, an operator should communicate a baseline message\nto excavators on an annual basis.\nGranite State has a portion of its pipeline in Essex County, Massachusetts. Granite State has records of\nmailing a baseline message to excavator in that county in 2008 and 2009 but not in 2010. Granite State\nwas unable to produce records that demonstrated it communicated a baseline message to excavator in\n2010.\n\n\n\n120131023W\n2. §192.616 Public awareness.\n(a) …\n(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations, including baseline\nand supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless the operator provides justification\nin its program or procedural manual as to why compliance with all or certain provisions of\nthe recommended practice is not practicable and not necessary for safety.\nGranite State failed to follow the general program recommendations, including baseline and supplemental\nrequirements in Section 4.3.1 of API RP 1162.\nSection 4.3.1 of API RP 1162 states that “[i]nformation about specific release characteristics and potential\nhazards posed by hazardous liquids or gases should be included” in the message content to stakeholders.\nGranite State mailed a brochure to the affected public in 2010 and 2011. Neither brochure contained\ninformation about the potential hazards of products transported in Granite State’s facilities. Granite State\ncould not provide any record that showed that the information was provided to the affected public.\n3. §192.616 Public awareness.\n(a) …\n(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations, including baseline\nand supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless the operator provides justification\nin its program or procedural manual as to why compliance with all or certain provisions of\nthe recommended practice is not practicable and not necessary for safety.\nGranite State failed to follow the general program recommendations, including baseline and supplemental\nrequirements under Section 4.7 of API RP 1162. Specifically, Granite State did not provide information\nabout whether it has High Consequence Areas (HCAs) and/or an Integrity Management Program (IMP) to\nthe affected public and emergency officials.\nSection 4.7 of API RP 1162 describes the information that should be included in the message content to\naffected public and emergency officials within HCAs. Pursuant to Section 4.7.1 of API RP 1162\noperators should include general information that some segments along their transmission pipeline are\ndesignated as HCAs and that an IMP has been developed, to affected public. Also, operators should\ninclude information on where to obtain an overview of their IMP or view upon request. Granite State\nmailed a brochure to the affected public in 2010 and 2011. Neither brochure contained information about\nGranite State’s IMP. Granite State could not provide any record that showed that the information was\nprovided to the affected public.\nIn addition, Section 4.7.2 of API RP 1162 requires operators to include an overview of the IMP to\nemergency officials as well as a chance for them to provide feedback on the IMP. Granite State mailed a\nbrochure to emergency responder in 2010 and 2011. Neither brochure contained information about\nGranite State’s IMP and how to provide feedback. In addition, the annual meeting invitation package sent\nto the emergency officials did not contain that information. Granite State could not provide any record\nthat showed it provided information mentioned in Section 4.7.2 of API RP 1162.\n4. §192.616 Public awareness.\n(a) …\n(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations, including baseline\nand supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless the operator provides justification\nin its program or procedural manual as to why compliance with all or certain provisions of\nthe recommended practice is not practicable and not necessary for safety.\n120131023W_WL_11132013 Page 2 of 3\n\n\n\n120131023W\nGranite State failed to follow the general recommendation, including baseline and supplemental\nrequirements in Section 8.4.2 of API RP 1162.\nSection 8.4.2 of API RP 1162, states that “[a]n effective method for assessing understandability is to\nsurvey the target stakeholder audience. . . . (emphasis added)” If an operator chose to “participate in and\nuse the results of an industry group or trade-association survey” then “the industry or trade-association\nsurvey should allow the operator to assess the results relevant to the operator’s own pipeline corridors and\nPublic Awareness Programs (emphasis added).”\nGranite State chose the survey method. Granite State also chose to participate in and use the results of\ntrade-association surveys. These surveys included results for those residing in town served by Unitil1\nand/or town through which the Granite State pipeline passes. In addition the survey results also include\nresults from those not served by Unitil or within the Granite State public awareness notification area.\nHowever, Granite State could not demonstrate that a survey was targeted to its stakeholder audience as\nprescribed in Section 8.4.2 of API RP 1162.\nUnder 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $200,000 per\nviolation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for a related series of violations.\nFor violations occurring prior to January 4, 2012, the maximum penalty may not exceed $100,000 per\nviolation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $1,000,000 for a related series of violations.\nWe have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided\nnot to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise\nyou to correct the items identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Granite State being subject\nto additional enforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to\nCPF 1-2013-1023W. Please send all correspondence in this matter to Byron Coy, PE, Director, PHMSA\nEastern Region, 820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103, W. Trenton, NJ 08628. Be advised that all material\nyou submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you\nbelieve that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C.\n552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with\nthe portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you\nbelieve the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nSincerely,\nByron Coy, PE\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nCC: NH PUC – Mr. Randy Knepper\n1 Granite State is one of the assets that Unitil owns.\n120131023W_WL_11132013 Page 3 of 3","truncated":false,"body_characters":9238}