{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120193001M","title":"DISTRIGAS OF MASSACHUSETTS LLC — Notice of Amendment","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2019-09-17","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of amendment citing 193.2605(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120193001m.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120193001m.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120193001m","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120193001M","body":"Notice of Amendment involving DISTRIGAS OF MASSACHUSETTS LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 193.2605(b). The case was opened on 2019-09-17 and is reported as closed as of 2020-08-27. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120193001M_Closure Letter_11182019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Closure%20Letter_11182019.pdf\n\n120193001M_Closure Letter_11182019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Closure%20Letter_11182019_text.pdf\n\n120193001M_Notice of Amendment_09172019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Notice%20of%20Amendment_09172019.pdf\n\n120193001M_Notice of Amendment_09172019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Notice%20of%20Amendment_09172019_text.pdf\n\n120193001M_Operator Post-Hearing Submission_03092020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Operator%20Post-Hearing%20Submission_03092020.pdf\n\n120193001M_Operator Pre-Hearing Submission_01102020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Operator%20Pre-Hearing%20Submission_01102020.pdf\n\n120193001M_Operator Rejection to Closure Letter_11192019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Operator%20Rejection%20to%20Closure%20Letter_11192019.pdf\n\n120193001M_Operator Request for Hearing and Request Preliminary Statement of Issues_10072019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Operator%20Request%20for%20Hearing%20and%20Request%20Preliminary%20Statement%20of%20Issues_10072019.pdf\n\n120193001M_Order Directing Amendment_08272020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Order%20Directing%20Amendment_08272020.pdf\n\n120193001M_Order Directing Amendment_08272020_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_Order%20Directing%20Amendment_08272020_text.pdf\n\n120193001M_PHC Hearing Scheduled_12272019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_PHC%20Hearing%20Scheduled_12272019.pdf\n\n120193001M_PHC Hearing Scheduled_12272019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120193001M/120193001M_PHC%20Hearing%20Scheduled_12272019_text.pdf\n\n120193001M_Order Directing Amendment_08272020_text.pdf\n\nAugust 27, 2020\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: anthony.scaraggi@na.engie.com\nMr. Anthony Scaraggi\nVice President of Operations\nDistrigas of Massachusetts, LLC\n18 Rover Street\nEverett, Massachusetts 02149\nRe: CPF No. 1-2019-3001M\nDear Mr. Scaraggi:\nEnclosed please find the Order Directing Amendment issued in the above-referenced case. It\nwithdraws the Notice of Amendment. Therefore, this enforcement action is now closed. Service\nof the Order Directing Amendment by electronic mail is effective upon the date of transmission,\nas provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nAlan K. Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Robert Burroughs, Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMs. Susan Olenchuk, Counsel for the Respondent, Van Ness Feldman, LLP,\nsam@vnf.com\nMs. Bryn S. Karaus, Counsel for Respondent, Van Ness Feldman, LLP, bsk@vnf.com\nMs. Susan Bergles, Assistant General Counsel, Exelon Corporation,\nsusan.bergles@exeloncorp.com\nCONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUESTED\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\nIn the Matter of )\nDistrigas of Massachusetts, LLC, ) CPF No. 1-2019-3001M\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nORDER DIRECTING AMENDMENT\nFrom June 11, 2019, through June 13, 2019, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of\nthe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of Distrigas of Massachusetts, LLC’s\n(Distrigas or Respondent),1 plans and procedures of its liquefied natural gas (LNG) Import\nTerminal in Everett, Massachusetts.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated September 17, 2019, a Notice of Amendment (NOA). In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.206, the NOA alleged certain inadequacies in the Respondent’s maintenance\nprocedures and proposed requiring Distrigas to amend its procedures to comply with 49 C.F.R.\n§ 193.2605 and § 193.2621(b).\nAfter requesting and receiving the case file, Distrigas responded to the NOA by letter dated\nOctober 7, 2019 (Response). Distrigas contested the allegations of inadequacy, provided a\nsummary of its position, and requested a hearing. On October 29, 2019, the Region notified the\nPresiding Official to schedule a hearing. Prior to scheduling the hearing, the Region sent a\nclosure letter to the operator on November 18, 2019, stating that the procedures submitted by the\nRespondent addressed the deficiencies identified in the NOA. On November 19, 2019, Distrigas\nresponded to the Closure Letter by reiterating its request for a hearing, stating that the NOA\nshould be fully withdrawn, and not closed. An informal hearing was held on January 21, 2020.\nWITHDRAWAL OF NOTICE OF AMENDMENT\nItem 1: The NOA alleged that the Respondent’s procedures were inadequate with regard to\n49 C.F.R. § 193.2605(b), which states:\n§ 193.2605 Maintenance procedures.\n1 Everett LNG Facility, formerly known as Distrigas, is a subsidiary of Exelon Generation Company, LLC.\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-3001M\nPage 2\n(a) ….\n(b) Each operator shall follow one or more manuals of written\nprocedures for the maintenance of each component, including any required\ncorrosion control. The procedures must include:\n(1) The details of the inspections or tests determined under paragraph\n(a) of this section and their frequency of performance; and\n(2) A description of other actions necessary to maintain the LNG plant\naccording to the requirements of this subpart.\nThe NOA alleged that Distrigas’ procedures for the maintenance of each component were\ninadequate. Specifically, the NOA alleged that Distrigas failed to include adequate guidance in its\nmaintenance procedures on how to keep records for the testing of transfer hoses, as required by\n§ 193.2621(b), which states that LNG hoses must be “visually inspected for damage or defects before\neach use.” The NOA alleged that Distrigas’ records and procedures omitted critical details. Upon\nreviewing the relevant procedures, the inspector noted several inadequacies in the record keeping and\nrelated procedures for the testing of transfer hoses required under § 193.2621(b). The NOA noted\ninadequacies in the following areas:\n1. Record retention requirements;\n2. Identification of what form/document, name/number that LNG truck loading transfers and\ntransfer hose visual inspections are to be documented on;\n3. A definition of \"Operator\", \"Shipper, Per\" and \"Carrier, Per\" from the Bill of Lading record\nfields;\n4. 5. Who completes/signs off on the Bill of Lading records; and\nDetails of the frequency of completing Bill of Lading records.\nDuring the hearing, the Region stated that, once it completed a thorough post inspection review\nof the operator’s original procedures, many of the NOA’s allegations were rendered moot (Items\n1, 2, 4, and 5). However, it continues to maintain that certain terms used in Distrigas’ original\nprocedure2 are inconsistent with the Bill of Lading (BOL) that Distrigas uses to record its\ncompliance with § 193.2621(b). The Director argues that this sole incongruity is a legitimate\nand independent basis for the issuance of the NOA and that closure (and not withdrawal) is\nappropriate.\nThe BOL uses the terms “Carrier” and “Shipper” while the original procedure simply referred to\n“Operator.” Following the inspection and in what it now argues was an attempt to assuage the\nOPS inspector’s concerns, Distrigas amended the original procedure. Distrigas’ updated\n(10/25/19) procedure now uses “Operator/Shipper” and includes the following note:\n“Operator/Shipper is also the shipper, per and the driver/carrier is also the carrier, per for all\nparts of this procedure and the uniform straight Bill of Lading.”3 The Respondent maintains that,\nwhile it amended the procedure, it was not admitting liability but rather assuaging the inspector’s\nconcerns. The Region continues to maintain that the original procedure was so deficient as to\nrender the issuance of the NOA necessary.\nThe only remaining dispute solely concerns whether the lack of complete congruity between the\n2 “Original procedure” refers to the procedure reviewed by OPS during the 2019 inspection.\n3 Pipeline Safety Case File, at 15 (September 13, 2019)(on file with PHMSA).\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-3001M\nPage 3\noriginal procedure and the BOL rise to the level of “inadequate to assure safe operation of a\npipeline facility,” the required standard for issuance of an NOA. Part 190.206 and Section 3 of\nthe Pipeline Enforcement procedures state the following:\n§ 190.206 states:\n§ 190.206 Amendment of plans or procedures.\n(a) A Regional Director begins a proceeding to determine whether an\noperator's plans or procedures required under parts 192, 193, 195, and 199\nof this subchapter are inadequate to assure safe operation of a pipeline\nfacility by issuing a notice of amendment. The notice will specify the\nalleged inadequacies and the proposed revisions of the plans or procedures\nand provide an opportunity to respond. The notice will allow the operator\n30 days following receipt of the notice to submit written comments, revised\nprocedures, or a request for a hearing under § 190.211.\n(b) After considering all material presented in writing or at the hearing,\nif applicable, the Associate Administrator determines whether the plans or\nprocedures are inadequate as alleged. The Associate Administrator issues\nan order directing amendment of the plans or procedures if they are\ninadequate, or withdraws the notice if they are not. In determining the\nadequacy of an operator's plans or procedures, the Associate Administrator\nmay consider:\n(1) Relevant pipeline safety data;\n(2) Whether the plans or procedures are appropriate for the particular\ntype of pipeline transportation or facility, and for the location of the facility;\n(3) The reasonableness of the plans or procedures; and\n(4) The extent to which the plans or procedures contribute to public safety.\nSection 3 of the Pipeline Enforcement Procedures states:\nA Notice of Amendment is used to notify an operator that its plans or\nprocedures required under 49 Parts 192, 193, 195, and 199 are\n“inadequate” to assure safe operation of a pipeline facility. Deficiencies\nrelated to an operator’s plans or procedures that cause them to be\n“inadequate” may include those that:\nRepeat or paraphrase the regulatory text, instead of providing\ninstructions for how to implement a regulatory requirement;\nProvide instructions for compliance in a vague, general or conflicting\nmanner that offers little or no practical or meaningful guidance, and\ntherefore increases the likelihood of error, confusion, or the exercise of\npoor judgment by the operator.\nA BOL ordinarily serves as evidence of a contract between a shipper and a carrier, and provides\na receipt upon the exchange of goods, in this case LNG. Distrigas also uses its BOL to comply\nwith the requirement that it visually inspected its transfer hoses. Simply put, whenever a\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-3001M\nPage 4\nshipment of LNG leaves the facility, the shipper must affirm by signature that they have\ncompleted the required inspection. The original procedure stated that “Operator’s full signature\non the Bill of Lading indicates that the truck load hoses have been visually inspected.” The BOL\nincluded Distrigas’ logo on the top left hand corner of the form, leaving no doubt that this is the\noperator’s form. At the bottom, there is a place for both the shipper and carrier’s signatures.\nThough the original procedure used the term “Operator” and not “Operator/Shipper” and the\nBOL uses the term “Shipper”, these basic terms are not so “vague, general or conflicting” that\nthey were “inadequate to assure safe operation” of this facility. The LNG plant will always be\nthe Operator (and shipper) and the carrier will always be the person picking up the LNG from the\nterminal. The personnel conducting the transaction and completing the BOL would be perfectly\naware of whether they represented the shipper or the carrier, irrespective of whether the\nprocedure used the term “shipper.” After reviewing the BOLs reviewed by the OPS inspector, I\nfind the records and the original procedure to be clear and capable of providing meaningful\nguidance.\nThe Respondent argues that it amended the original procedure to address the inspector’s\nconcerns, and did not intend to admit that its original procedure was so lacking as to endanger\nthe safe operation of its facility. Based upon my review of the original procedure, and in light of\nthe fact that there were no missing or incomplete records, nor any documented instance where\nthe procedure triggered confusion for the operator’s personnel, I conclude that the original\nprocedure provided sufficiently clear instructions on how to implement the regulatory\nrequirement (i.e., proper execution of the BOL following the visual inspection). Contrary to the\nRegion’s determination, I further conclude that the required form was not “vague, general, or\nconflicting ... [such that it] offer[ed] little or no practical or meaningful guidance.” (Enforcement\nProcedures, Section 3). While the Region had legitimate concerns at the time of the inspection,\nit appears the substantive concerns were ultimately addressed by procedures that existed at the\ntime of the inspection but had not yet been reviewed by the Region.\nThe Notice of Amendment is withdrawn.\nAugust 27, 2020\n___________________________________ ______________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n120193001M_PHC Hearing Scheduled_12272019_text.pdf\n\nDecember 27, 2019\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL AND EMAIL TO: Susan.Bergles@exeloncorp.com and\nRobert.Burrough@dot.gov\nMs. Susan B. Bergles\nAssistant General Counsel\nExelon Business Services Co., LLC\n1310 Point Street, 8th Floor\nBaltimore, Maryland 21231\nMr. Robert Burrough\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103\nWest Trenton, New Jersey 08628\nRe: Notice of Hearing, Distrigas of Massachusetts, LLC\nCPF No. 1-2019-3001M\nDear Ms. Bergles and Mr. Burrough:\nIn accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.211, an informal hearing will be held regarding the Notice of\nAmendment issued to Distrigas of Massachusetts, LLC, by the Office of Pipeline Safety in the\nabove-referenced matter. The hearing will take place via teleconference on January 21, 2020,\nbeginning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time.\nAt least 10 calendar days prior to the hearing (or by January 11, 2020), both parties must submit and\nexchange any additional written materials they intend to present at the hearing and a list of\nattendees. This information should be provided electronically. Materials not submitted by this date\nmay be excluded. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (202) 366-6139.\nSincerely,\nKristin Baldwin\nPresiding Official\ncc: Ms. Ajoke Agboola, Counsel for Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMs. Bryn Karaus, Counsel for Distrigas of Massachusetts, Van Ness Feldman, LLP\nMs. Susan A. Olenchuk, Counsel for Distrigas of Massachusetts, Van Ness Feldman, LLP\n\n120193001M_Operator Rejection to Closure Letter_11192019.pdf\n\nRECEIVED NOV 2 0 2019\nKH\nExelon\nSusan B. Bergles\nTacon Cmporation\nAssistant Cieneral (punsel\n1310 Pont Street Sth Floor\n4410) 470-1753\nBaltimore, MD 21231\nsusan bergles exconcorp com\nNovember 19, 2019\nBy Email and Overnight Courier\nMs. Kristin Baldwin\nPresiding Official\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue SE\nEast Building\nWashington, DC 20590\nRe: Distrigas of Massachusetts, LLC, CPF 1-2019-3001M\nObjection to Closure Letter\nDear Ms. Baldwin,\nDistrigas of Massachusetts, LLC (Distrigas) objects to the letter issued by the Eastern\nRegion Director on November 18, 2019 purporting to close this Notice of Amendment (NOA)\nDistrigas submitted in this proceeding on October 7, 2019. As such, the Closure Letter violates\nproceeding (Closure Letter). The Closure Letter nullifies the pending request for hearing that\nsections 190.206(a) and 190.211 of PHMSA's regulations' which grant Distrigas the right to a\nhearing before a Presiding Official and the opportunity to challenge the allegation contained in\nthe NOA. The Closure Letter also exceeds the Region Director's authority because the\nproceeding is pending before the Presiding Official. As requested in the Presiding Official's\nemail, dated November 12, 2019, offering dates on which to schedule the hearing, Distrigas\nrequests that the Presiding Official disregard the Closure Letter and schedule the hearing for\nJanuary 21 or 22, 2020.\nand in follow-up correspondence, the inspector raised questions regarding the adequacy of the\nThe NOA arose from an on-site inspection on June 10-13, 2019. During that inspection\nMarch 3, 2018 version of Distrigas's Truck Loading Procedure, EMT-005.2 On June 28, 2019,\nin response to the inspector's request, Distrigas submitted a revised version of the Truck Loading\nProcedure, EMT-005, dated June 25, 2019, addressing the inspector's concerns. At no time\nduring the inspection or in subsequent correspondence did the inspector raise any questions or\nconcerns about Distrigas's Record Retention Procedure RC-003 or request that Distrigas provide\na copy of it.\n1 49 C.F.R. § 190.206(a) & 190.211 (2018).\n* Distrigas Everett Marine Terminal Operating Procedure Manual - Truck Loading EMT-005 (updated March 3,\n2018).\nPage 1 of 3\n\n\n\nOn September 17, 2019, the Office of Pipeline Safety issued the NOA in CPF 1-2019-\n3001M alleging that one of Distrigas's maintenance procedures was inadequate under 49 C.F.R\n§ 193.2605. Specifically, PHMSA alleged that the June 25, 2019 revised version of Distrigas's\nTruck Loading Procedure EMT-005 failed to include adequate guidance on record keeping for\nthe testing of transfer hoses under § 193.2621(b). As provided under 49 C.F.R. §$ 190.206(a)\nand 190.211, on October 7, 2019, Distrigas submitted a Request for Hearing and Preliminary\nStatement of Issues in response to the NOA.\nOn Wednesday, November 13, 2019, Distrigas and its counsel and the Eastern Region\nand its counsel held an informal meeting via conference call to discuss potential resolution of the\nallegation in the NOA. The parties did not resolve the NOA. During that discussion, the Eastern\nRegion requested a copy of the Distrigas record retention procedure. Distrigas provided its\nRecord Retention Procedure RC-003 on November 13. This procedure had been available to the\nEastern Region inspectors during the inspection in June 2019, and it had not been amended since\nthat time.\nOn November 14, Distrigas received an email from Counsel for the Eastern Region\nstating that the region had reviewed Distrigas's updated procedure (i.e.. the June 25, 2019\nthe issues raised in the NOA have been addressed.\" Counsel for the Eastern Region stated that,\nrevised Truck Loading Procedure) and Distrigas's record retention procedure, and \"found that\nif Distrigas were willing to withdraw its request for a hearing. the Eastern Region would issue a\nclosure letter.\nOn Monday, November 18, 2018, Distrigas received the Closure Letter.\nThe Closure Letter is not the same as withdrawing the NOA because the Closure Letter is\nequivalent to a finding that Distrigas's Truck Loading procedure was inadequate and required\namendment in order to satisfy the NOA and pipeline safety regulations. That is not the case here\nwhere the Eastern Region found that the revised June 25, 2019 Truck Loading Procedure\nprovided to the Eastern Region before the NOA was issued was adequate. The appropriate\ncourse of action is to withdraw the NOA because there was no basis for issuing the NOA in the\nfirst place.\nThis is not a question of semantics. Distrigas is adversely affected by the Closure Letter\nbecause it gives the false impression in a public docket that Distrigas's June 25, 2019 Truck\nLoading Procedure was inadequate. The Closure Letter also constitutes a prior enforcement\naction in a potential future proceeding. Withdrawing the NOA, by contrast, properly recognizes\nthat the Truck Loading Procedure was adequate prior to the issuance of the NOA.\nIn its request for a hearing, Distrigas maintains that OPS failed to meet its burden of\nproving that its Truck Loading Procedure is inadequate. The Closure Letter nullifies that request\nfor hearing and violates sections 190.206(a) and 190.211 which provide respondents the right to\nchallenge an NOA in a hearing. Distrigas filed that request for hearing and the case is now\npending before the Presiding Official. The Eastern Region lacks authority to issue the Closure\nLetter and thereby deprive Distrigas of its right a hearing.\nPage 2 of 3\n\n\n\nDistrigas requests that the Presiding Official disregard the Closure Letter as an altra vires\naction. In response to the Presiding Official's November 12, 2019 email containing suggested\n2020.\ndates for the hearing, Distrigas respectfully requests that the hearing be held on January 21 or 22,\nThank you for your attention on this matter.\nSincerely.\ndesanD Dex\nSusan B. Bergles\nAssistant General Counsel\nExelon Business Services Co., LLC\nCC:\nAjoke Agboola, Esq., Counsel for the Eastern Region, OPS\nRobert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA\nEdward Gleason, General Manager, Northeast Region, Exelon Generation\nSusan Stritter, Sr. Compliance Specialist, Exelon Generation LLC\nSusan A. Olenchuk, Counsel for Respondent, Van Ness Feldman, LLP\nBryn Karaus, Counsel for Respondent, Van Ness Feldman, LLP\nPage 3 of 3\n\n120193001M_Notice of Amendment_09172019_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF AMENDMENT\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY\nSeptember 17, 2019\nFrank Katulak\nPresident & Chief Operating Officer\nDistrigas of Massachusetts, LLC\n18 Rover Street\nEverett, MA 02149\nCPF 1-2019-3001M\nDear Mr. Katulak:\nOn June 11 to June 13, 2019, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), inspected\nDistrigas of Massachusetts, LLC (Distrigas)’s LNG Terminal in Everett, Massachusetts.\nOn the basis of the inspection, PHMSA has identified the apparent inadequacy found within\nDistrigas’ plans or procedures, as described below:\n1. § 193.2605 Maintenance procedures.\n(a) ...\n(b) Each operator shall follow one or more manuals of written procedures for the\nmaintenance of each component, including any required corrosion control. The\nprocedures must include:\n(1) The details of the inspections or tests determined under paragraph (a) of this\nsection and their frequency of performance; and\n(2) A description of other actions necessary to maintain the LNG plant according to\nthe requirements of this subpart.\nDistrigas’ procedures for the maintenance of each component were inadequate. Specifically,\nDistrigas’ Everett Marine Terminal Operating Procedure Manual – Truck Loading EMT-05,\n\n\n\nupdated 3/3/18 (Procedure) failed to include adequate guidance on record keeping for the testing\nof transfer hoses required by § 193.2621(b).\nSection 193.2621(b) states:\n“Hoses used in LNG or flammable refrigerant transfer systems must be:\n…\n(b) Visually inspected for damage or defects before each use.”\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspector reviewed Distrigas’ Procedure and associated 2018\nRecords for the testing of transfer hoses before each LNG truck loading transfer, identified by\nDistrigas as its Uniform Straight Bill of Lading document. The Records indicated many missing\ncontent fields including, but not limited to: “load number”, “out time”, “carrier per”, “hot tank”,\n“trailer plate”, “state.” The Procedure failed to include sufficient guidance on how to record the\ninformation on the Bill of Lading record. When the PHMSA inspector asked Distrigas how and\nwhen this data is to be completed, Distrigas provided the Procedure.\nThe Procedure failed to provide details such as:\n Record retention requirements\n Identification of what form/document, name/number that LNG truck loading transfers and\ntransfer hose visual inspections are to be documented on\n A definition of “Operator”, “Shipper, Per” and “Carrier, Per” from the Bill of Lading record\nfields\n Who completes/signs off on the Bill of Lading records\n Details of the frequency of completing Bill of Lading records\nSubsequent to the PHMSA inspection, Distrigas provided an updated version of the Procedure,\nrevised 6/25/19. However, this revised procedure failed to address the recordkeeping details listed\nabove.\nTherefore, Distrigas failed to include adequate guidance in its maintenance procedures on record\nkeeping for its testing of transfer hoses required by § 193.2621(b).\nResponse to this Notice\nThis Notice is provided pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60108(a) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.206. Enclosed as\npart of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement\nProceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be advised that all\nmaterial you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly\navailable. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential\ntreatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a\nsecond copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment\n120193001M_Notice of Amendment_09172019_text Page 2 of 3\n\n\n\nredacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential\ntreatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nFollowing the receipt of this Notice, you have 30 days to submit written comments, revised\nprocedures, or a request for a hearing under §190.211. If you do not respond within 30 days of\nreceipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice\nand authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice\nwithout further notice to you and to issue an Order Directing Amendment. If your plans or\nprocedures are found inadequate as alleged in this Notice, you may be ordered to amend your plans\nor procedures to correct the inadequacies (49 C.F.R. § 190.206). If you are not contesting this\nNotice, we propose that you submit your amended procedures to my office within 30 days of\nreceipt of this Notice. This period may be extended by written request for good cause. Once the\ninadequacies identified herein have been addressed in your amended procedures, this enforcement\naction will be closed.\nIt is requested (not mandated) that Distrigas of Massachusetts, LLC maintain documentation of\nthe safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Notice of Amendment\n(preparation/revision of plans, procedures) and submit the total to Robert Burrough, Director,\nPHMSA Eastern Region, 840 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 300, West Trenton, NJ 08628. Please refer\nto CPF 1-2019-3001M on each document you submit, and whenever possible provide a signed\nPDF copy in electronic format. Smaller files may be emailed to robert.burrough@dot.gov. Larger\nfiles should be sent on USB flash drive accompanied by the original paper copy to the Eastern\nRegion Office.\nAdditionally, if you choose to respond to this (or any other case), please ensure that any response\nletter pertains solely to one CPF case number.\nSincerely,\nRobert Burrough\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nEnclosure: Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement Proceedings\n120193001M_Notice of Amendment_09172019_text Page 3 of 3\n\n120193001M_Closure Letter_11182019_text.pdf\n\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY\nNovember 18, 2019\nFrank Katulak\nPresident & Chief Operating Officer\nDistrigas of Massachusetts, LLC\n18 Rover Street\nEverett, MA 02149\nCPF 1-2019-3001M\nDear Mr. Katulak:\nFrom June 11 to June 13, 2019, a representative from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, conducted an on-\nsite pipeline safety inspection of Distrigas of Massachusetts, LLC (Distrigas) procedures in\nEverett, Massachusetts. On June 13, 2019, Distrigas was notified of apparent inadequacies found\nwithin its procedures during the inspection exit interview. Distrigas provided updated procedures\non June 25, 2019.\nPHMSA issued a Notice of Amendment on September 17, 2019, which proposed amendment of\nyour procedures. Distrigas provided its Record Retention procedures on November 13, 2019.\nMy staff reviewed the amended procedures submitted on June 25, 2019 and the Record Retention\nprocedures submitted on November 13, 2019, and it appears that the inadequacies outlined in this\nNotice of Amendment have been corrected.\nThis letter is to inform you no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank you\nfor your cooperation.\nSincerely,\nRobert Burrough\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","truncated":false,"body_characters":29554}