# RICHMOND, CITY OF — Warning Letter

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 12026056WL
- **title:** RICHMOND, CITY OF — Warning Letter
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2026-06-30
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED warning letter citing 192.605(a).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12026056wl.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12026056wl.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12026056wl
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/12026056WL
**body:**

Warning Letter involving RICHMOND, CITY OF. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.605(a). The case was opened on 2026-06-30 and is reported as closed as of 2026-06-30. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

12026056WL_Warning Letter_06302026_(26-373633).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026056WL/12026056WL_Warning%20Letter_06302026_(26-373633).pdf

12026056WL_Warning Letter_06302026_(26-373633)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026056WL/12026056WL_Warning%20Letter_06302026_(26-373633)_text.pdf

12026056WL_Warning Letter_06302026_(26-373633)_text.pdf

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
840 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 300
West Trenton, New Jersey 08628
609.771.7800
WARNING LETTER
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: daniel.rifenburgh@rva.gov
June 30, 2026
Daniel Rifenburgh
Director
City of Richmond
400 Richmond Highway
Richmond, Virginia 23224
CPF 1-2026-056-WL
Dear Mr. Rifenburgh:
On March 30, 2026, an inspector from the Virginia State Corporation Commission, Division of
Pipeline Safety (VA SCC), acting as an agent for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) inspected
City of Richmond’s (City) procedures for gas pipeline Operator Qualification (OQ) and Operations
and Maintenance (O&M) at 4113 Hanover Avenue, Richmond, Virginia.
As a result of the inspection, it is alleged that the City has committed probable violations of the
Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The items inspected
and the probable violations are:
1. § 192.605 Procedures manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.
(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each
pipeline, a manual of written procedures for conducting operations and
maintenance activities and for emergency response. For transmission
lines, the manual must also include procedures for handling abnormal
operations. This manual must be reviewed and updated by the operator
at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar
year. This manual must be prepared before operations of a pipeline
system commence. Appropriate parts of the manual must be kept at
locations where operations and maintenance activities are conducted.
The City failed to follow its manual of written procedure for conducting operations and
maintenance activities in accordance with section 192.605(a). Specifically, the City failed to



CPF 1-2026-056-WL
follow its operations and maintenance procedures manual, UTILITY: Natural Gas (vol. II, chap.
2), Sections IV (rev. 1/9/26) and V (rev. 11/15/13) (“Procedures”) by failing to control the flow of
blowing gas from a service line through the use of a squeeze-off or a valve closure.
The Procedures, Section IV, Paragraph VII.C.1.a, state: “Whenever practical, squeeze-offs and
valve closures to stop an uncontrolled release of natural gas should be performed far enough from
the point of release to ensure the safety of the personnel performing them in the event of an
accidental ignition.”
The Procedures, Section IV, Paragraph III.A, state: “Where practical, [the City] will avoid the
release of natural gas to the atmosphere and, especially, the uncontrolled formation of combustible
gas mixtures.”
The Procedures, Section V, Paragraph III.A, define “blowing gas” as, in part: “a release of natural
gas in outside, non-confined space locations that can be heard, seen or felt.”
The Procedures, Section V, Paragraph V.A.1, state: “The ideal method for protecting a worker is
to eliminate hazards. For a blowing gas situation, this could include shutting off the gas at a valve
or with a squeeze-off device at a location away from the flammable atmosphere.”
Upon arrival, the VA SCC inspector smelled a strong odor of gas and heard an audible release of
gas coming from an excavation around which the City’s contractor crew was performing work.
The VA SCC inspector discovered that the contractor crew had cut a live, low-pressure gas service
line as part of the service change over work and had placed putty in the pipe end in an attempt to
stop the flow of gas. The contractor crew stated it had opted to cut the service line while it was
under pressure because the curb valve was inaccessible. The contractor crew also stated that it was
allowing the gas to continue blowing while it waited for materials to be delivered to install an end
cap on the cut service line.
Following this initial discussion, the VA SCC inspector suggested the contractor crew place gas
monitoring equipment in the excavation, which provided a sustained reading of 0.5 percent gas in
air. The VA SCC inspector asked the contractor crew how it planned to control the flow of blowing
gas, given that no flow control equipment was currently in place. The contractor crew ultimately
worked to expose more of the service line upstream of the cut to facilitate a squeeze-off. The VA
SCC inspector observed as the contractor crew squeezed off the service line, stopping the release
of blowing gas. Later, the contractor crew proceeded to install an end cap on the service line.
Therefore, the City failed to follow its manual of written procedures for conducting operations and
maintenance activities in accordance with section 192.605(a).
Under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed
$272,926 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,729,245 for a related
series of violations. For violation occurring on or after December 28, 2023 and before December
30, 2024, the maximum penalty may not exceed $266,015 per violation per day the violation
persists, up to a maximum of $2,660,135 for a related series of violations. For violation occurring
on or after January 6, 2023 and before December 28, 2023, the maximum penalty may not exceed
Page 2 of 3



CPF 1-2026-056-WL
$257,664 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,576,627 for a related
series of violations. For violation occurring on or after March 21, 2022 and before January 6, 2023,
the maximum penalty may not exceed $239,142 per violation per day the violation persists, up to
a maximum of $2,391,142 for a related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after
May 3, 2021 and before March 21, 2022, the maximum penalty may not exceed $225,134 per
violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,251,334 for a related series of
violations. For violation occurring on or after January 11, 2021 and before May 3, 2021, the
maximum penalty may not exceed $222,504 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a
maximum of $2,225,034 for a related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after July
31, 2019 and before January 11, 2021, the maximum penalty may not exceed $218,647 per
violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for a 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 items identified in this letter. Failure to do so may result in City
of Richmond being subject to additional enforcement action.
No reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to
CPF 1-2026-056-WL. 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,
Robert Burrough
Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
cc: Eddie Childers, Operations Manager, City of Richmond, eddie.childers@rva.gov
Jarrod Cath, Engineer, City of Richmond, Jarrod.Cath@rva.gov
Page 3 of 3
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 8402
