{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120140002","title":"THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2014-08-14","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.303, 192.355, 192.465, 192.603, 192.605, 192.747(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120140002.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120140002.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120140002","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120140002","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.303,  192.355,  192.465,  192.603,  192.605,  192.747(a). The case was opened on 2014-08-14 and is reported as closed as of 2015-12-11. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120140002_Closure Letter_12112015.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_Closure%20Letter_12112015.pdf\n\n120140002_Closure Letter_12112015_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_Closure%20Letter_12112015_text.pdf\n\n120140002_Final Order_07242015.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_Final%20Order_07242015.pdf\n\n120140002_Final Order_07242015_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_Final%20Order_07242015_text.pdf\n\n120140002_NOPV_PCO_08142014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_NOPV_PCO_08142014.pdf\n\n120140002_NOPV_PCO_08142014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_NOPV_PCO_08142014_text.pdf\n\n120140002_Operator Response and Request for Assistance_09112014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140002/120140002_Operator%20Response%20and%20Request%20for%20Assistance_09112014.pdf\n\n120140002_Final Order_07242015_text.pdf\n\nJuly 24, 2015\nMr. Eric J. Barron, President\nPenn State University\n201 Old Main\nUniversity Park, PA 16802\nRe: CPF No. 1-2014-0002\nDear Mr. Barron:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Penn State University to comply with the\npipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been completed, as\ndetermined by the Director, Eastern Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of\nthe Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise\nprovided 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: Mr. Byron Coy, Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA OPS\nMr. H. Ford Stryker, Associate VP, Physical Plant\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\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)\nPENN STATE UNIVERSITY, ) CPF No. 1-2014-0002\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom November 19-23, 2013, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),\nconducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of the master meter\nsystem on the Penn State University campus (PSU or Respondent) in University Park,\nPennsylvania. Penn State University is an international research university that owns and\noperates multiple campuses and residence facilities in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania that\nhave master meter systems.\n1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated August 14, 2014, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order\n(Notice), which also included a warning pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that PSU had committed various violations of 49\nC.F.R. Part192 and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged\nviolations. The warning items required no further action, but warned the operator to correct the\nprobable violation or face possible enforcement action.\nPSU responded to the Notice by letter dated September 11, 2014 (Response). The company did\nnot contest the allegations of violation but requested PHMSA’s assistance in expediting\ncompliance. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, PSU did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part\n192, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.303, which states:\n1 See http://www.opp.psu.edu. Current as of June 4, 2015.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 1-2014-0002\nPage 2\n§ 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\nthis part.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.303 by failing to have defined\nconstruction procedures consistent with 49 C.F.R. Part 192 that outlined requirements for\nactivities related to its gas-piping system. Specifically, the Notice alleged that during the\ninspection, a PHMSA inspector asked the PSU Supervisor for Steam Distribution and Gas\nSystems (PSU Supervisor) to provide construction procedures to demonstrate compliance with\n§ 192.303. The PSU Supervisor stated that PSU did not have written procedures for\nconstruction, but did present several industry standards that PSU used for reference. PSU\nSupervisor never produced a comprehensive set of written procedures governing construction\nthat are consistent with Part 192 however. Respondent did not contest this allegation of\nviolation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent\nviolated 49 C.F.R. § 192.303 by failing to have defined construction procedures consistent with\n49 C.F.R. Part 192.\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.355(b)(2), which states in\nrelevant part:\n§ 192.355 Customer meters and regulators: Protection from damage.\n(a) …\n(b) Service regulator vents and relief vents. Service regulator vents\nand relief vents must terminate outdoors, and the outdoor terminal must-\n(1) …\n(2) Be located at a place where gas from the vent can escape freely\ninto the atmosphere and away from any opening into the building; and….\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.355(b)(2) by failing to install\nregulators at a place where gas from the regulator vent can escape freely into the atmosphere and\naway from any opening into a building. Specifically, the Notice alleged that during field\ninspections, the PHMSA inspector observed and took a photograph of regulator vents positioned\nnear the heater intake vent at the South Frear Building and near the building ventilation system\nvent at the Poultry P3 Building. The PSU Supervisor noted that he was aware of the requirement\nto avoid venting gas near openings into buildings, but that it was inadvertently overlooked.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.355 by failing to install\nregulators at a place where gas from the regulator vent can escape freely into the atmosphere and\naway from any opening into a building.\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465, which states:\n§ 192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(a) Each pipeline that is under cathodic protection must be tested at\n\n\n\nCPF No. 1-2014-0002\nPage 3\nleast once each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 15 months,\nto determine whether the cathodic protection meets the requirements of\n§ 192.463.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465 by failing to test each pipeline\nthat is under cathodic protection at least once each calendar year, with intervals not to exceed\n15 months, to determine whether the cathodic protection meets the requirements of § 192.463.\nSpecifically, the Notice alleged that during the inspection, PSU produced procedures that require\nclose interval surveys (CIS) every three years on their gas system, and information detailing a\n2008 and 2010 CIS. PSU could not produce documentation of external corrosion monitoring for\n2009, 2011 or 2012 which is mandatory under the regulations. Respondent did not contest this\nallegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that\nRespondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465 by failing to test each pipeline that is under cathodic\nprotection at least once each calendar year, with intervals not to exceed 15 months, to determine\nwhether the cathodic protection meets the requirements of § 192.463.\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d), which states:\n§ 192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(a) …\n(b) …\n(c) …\n(d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any\ndeficiencies indicated by the monitoring.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(d) by failing to take prompt\nremedial action to correct cathodic protection deficiencies identified during a 2008 CIS of their\npipeline systems. Specifically, the Notice alleged that during the inspection, a PHMSA inspector\nreviewed problematic documentation of multiple CISs done by a PSU contractor on June 21-25,\n2008 and July 21-25, 2010.\nThe 2008 report showed:\n• “[F]ive areas shower pipe-to-soil potentials more negative than -0.850V, which indicates\nthat they are under cathodic protection.”\n• “There are areas where pipe-to-soil potentials are generally in the range of -0.500V to\n-0.600V, indicating no cathodic protection and installation of dielectric insulators are\nrecommended to correct the inadequacy.”\no Six locations were determined to be deficient.\nThe 2010 report showed:\n• The pipe-to-soil potentials that were generally in the -0.500V to -0.600V range during the\n2008 survey were unchanged and, installation of six dielectric insulators was\nrecommended again.\nAs of November 19, 2013, dielectric insulators at the six locations with low cathodic protection\npotentials has not been installed, and no other work had been performed by PSU to correct the\n\n\n\nCPF No. 1-2014-0002\nPage 4\ndeficiencies identified during the 2008 and 2010 surveys. Respondent did not contest this\nallegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that\nRespondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465 by failing to take prompt remedial action to correct\ncathodic protection deficiencies identified during a 2008 CIS of its pipeline systems.\nItem 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.603, which states in\nrelevant part:\n§ 192.603 General Provisions.\n(a) No person may operate a segment of pipeline unless it is operated\nin accordance with this subpart.\n(b) Each operator shall keep records necessary to administer the\nprocedures established under § 193.605\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.603 by failing to keep records\nnecessary to administer procedures established under § 193.605. Their operators are required to\nkeep records to demonstrate that the procedure manual for operations, maintenance and\nemergencies was reviewed and updated at intervals not exceeding 15 months but at least once\neach calendar year. Specifically, the Notice alleged that during the inspection the PSU\nsupervisor could not produce documentation to show the procedure manual was ever reviewed or\nupdated on a regular basis. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly,\nbased upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.603\nby failing to keep records necessary to administer procedures established under § 193.605.\nItem 6: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a) which states:\n§ 192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline, a manual\nof written procedures for conducting operations and maintenance activities\nand for emergency response. For transmission lines, the manual must also\ninclude procedures for handling abnormal operations. This manual must\nbe reviewed and updated by the operator at intervals not exceeding 15\nmonths, but at least once each calendar year. This manual must be\nprepared before operations of a pipeline system commence. Appropriate\nparts of the manual must be kept at locations where operations and\nmaintenance 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 operations and maintenance activities. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged that PSU’s procedures state that “[a]ny Grade 2 leak not repaired within 6 months should\nbe rechecked to assure that it has not become more hazardous.” PSU failed to recheck the Grade\n2 gas leaks below within 6 months of discovery:\n• Leak WA-12-BL-3 found on 6/19/2012 / re-checked 10/18/2012 / repaired on 8/13/2013\n(six-month interval exceeded after 10/18/2012 re-check).\n• Leak FXS-12-BV-1 found on 7/31/2012 / repaired on 10/14/2013 (six month interval\nexceeded after initial discovery).\n\n\n\nCPF No. 1-2014-0002\nPage 5\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605 by failing to follow its own\nmanual of written procedures for operations and maintenance activities.\nItem 7: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.747(a), which states:\n§ 192.747 Valve maintenance.\n(a) Each valve, the use of which may be necessary for the safe\noperation of a distribution system, must be checked and serviced at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.747(a) by failing to check and\nservice each valve which may be necessary for the safe operation of a distribution system, at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months but at least once each calendar year. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged that during the inspection, the PSU Supervisor provided documentation for emergency\nvalve inspections conducted in 2010 and 2011, and the PHMSA inspector identified the\nfollowing inspection intervals:\n• Valve Poultry Building – 7/20/2010 to 11/17/2011 (15 months and 28 days)\n• Valve Academic Activities – 6/25/2010 to 11/30/2011 (17 months and 5 days)\n• Valve Fox Hollow South – 6/10/2010 to 11/17/2011 (17 months and 7 days)\n• Valve Shields – 7/22/2010 to 11/22/2011 (16 months)\n• Valve Walker – 6/29/2010 to 11/22/2011 (16 months and 24 days)\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.747(a) by failing to check and\nservice each valve which may be necessary for the safe operation of a distribution system, at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months but at least once each calendar year.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1-5 in the Notice for violations of\n49 C.F.R. §§ 192.303, 192.355, 192.465, and 192.603, respectively. Under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of gas or who owns or operates a\npipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under\nchapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.217,\nRespondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety\nregulations applicable to its operations:\n1. With respect to the violation of § 192.303 (Item 1), Respondent must develop\nwritten procedures, consistent with the requirements in Part 192, for performing\nconstruction activities on the gas piping systems. The procedures must include\n\n\n\nCPF No. 1-2014-0002\nPage 6\nreference to specific industry standards that are to be applied in this system.\nProcedures must be submitted within 120 days from the date of the Final Order.\n2. With respect to the violation of § 192.355 (Item 2), Respondent must re-evaluate\nthe regulator vent placement at all locations throughout the gas piping system and\ncorrect all deficiencies identified, including the locations outlined in Item 2 of this\nOrder. The evaluation, including all remediation, must be completed within 120 days\nfrom the date of the Final Order.\n3. With respect to the violation of § 192.465 (Item 3), Respondent must develop\nprocedures to address the requirements of 192.465(a). The procedures must include:\n• A methodology for determining locations for monitoring\n• Guidance to personnel performing the monitoring, and\n• Documentation requirements\nPSU must perform a survey on their gas piping system in accordance with the\nprocedures developed. Procedures must be submitted to the PHMSA Eastern\nDirector for review/approval within 90 days from the date of the Final Order. Survey\nwork must be completed within 90 days following PHMSA’s review/approval of the\nprocedures.\n4. With respect to the violation of § 192.465 (Item 4), Respondent must re-test and\nremediate (as necessary) all identified locations in this Final Order. All testing and\nremediation must be completed within 180 days from the date of the Final Order.\n5. With respect to the violation of § 192.603 (Item 5), Respondent must review their\nprocedure manual for operations, maintenance and emergencies and create a record to\ndemonstrate compliance. The review must be completed within 120 from the date of\nthe Final Order.\n6. It is requested (not mandated) that PSU maintain documentation of the safety\nimprovement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the\ntotal to Byron Coy, Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA OPS. It is requested that these\ncosts be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision\nof plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an\nextension.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nnot to exceed $200,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the\nAttorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 1-2014-0002\nPage 7\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 6 and 7, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 192 but did not\npropose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered to\nbe warning items. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.605 (Item 6) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to follow its own\nmanual for operations and maintenance activities; and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.747 (Item 7) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to check and service\neach valve which may be necessary for the safe operation of a distribution system,\nat intervals not exceeding 15 months but at least once each calendar year.\nIf OPS finds a violation of these items in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to\nfuture enforcement action.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of\nthis Final Order. The petition must be sent to: Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline\nSafety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC\n20590, with a copy sent to the Office of Chief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. PHMSA\nwill accept petitions received no later than 20 days after receipt of service of this Final Order by\nthe Respondent, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other\nrequirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. Unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a\nstay, the terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n120140002_Closure Letter_12112015_text.pdf\n\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY\nDecember 11, 2015\nMr. Joseph J. Doncsecz\nAssociate Vice President for Finance and Corporate Controller\nThe Pennsylvania State University\n408 Old Main\nUniversity Park, PA 16802-1505\nCPF 1-2014-0002\nDear Mr. Doncsecz:\nOn July 24, 2015, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline\nSafety, issued Penn State University (PSU) a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This\nOrder included a Compliance Order. The Compliance Order required PSU to take certain\nactions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety regulations applicable to its operations.\nSubsequently, we received your letter dated November 24, 2015, wherein you responded to this\nCompliance Order, and submitted related documentation. Based on our review of your\nNovember 24, 2015 submission, it has been determined that you have complied with the terms of\nthis Order.\nAccordingly, this case is now closed, and no further action is contemplated with respect to the\nmatters involved in this case.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nByron Coy, PE\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","truncated":false,"body_characters":21458}