{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 220110004W","title":"AMERIGAS PROPANE LP — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2011-04-06","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 192.465(b), 192.465(d), 192.467(d), 192.481(a), 192.491(c), 192.605(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220110004w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220110004w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220110004w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/220110004W","body":"Warning Letter involving AMERIGAS PROPANE LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.465(b),  192.465(d),  192.467(d),  192.481(a),  192.491(c),  192.605(a). The case was opened on 2011-04-06 and is reported as closed as of 2011-04-06. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n220110004W_warning letter_04062011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220110004W/220110004W_warning%20letter_04062011.pdf\n\n220110004W_warning letter_04062011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220110004W/220110004W_warning%20letter_04062011_text.pdf\n\n220110004W_warning letter_04062011_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nApril 6, 2011\nMr. Eugene Bissell\nPresident & CEO\nAmerigas Propane LP\nP.O.Box: 965\nValley Forge, PA 19482-0965\nCPF 2-2011-0004W\nDear Mr. Bissell:\nFrom February 28 to March 2, 2011, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration (PHMSA) inspected the procedures, records, and facilities of four\nAmerigas Propane (Amerigas) liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) pipeline systems in\nJacksonville, Florida, pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code. The Amerigas LPG\nsystems inspected served the Arlington 7, Arlington 610, San Jose, and San Mateo\nsub-divisions.\nAs a result of the inspection, it appears that Amerigas has committed probable violations of\nthe Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected\nand the probable violations are:\n1. §192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(b) Each cathodic protection rectifier or other impressed current power source\nmust be inspected six times each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 2\n1/2 months, to insure that it is operating.\n... (d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any deficiencies\nindicated by the monitoring.\nWhile Amerigas appears to have read its rectifiers on the Arlington 7, Arlington 610,\nSan Jose, and San Mateo sub-divisions systems every month in 2011, Amerigas had not\ninitiated any prompt remedial action to correct the deficiency found with the San Mateo\nsystem rectifier during the monitoring in January and February in 2011.\n\n\n\nThe operator’s records show 0.001Amp current output on its San Mateo system rectifier\non January 26, 2011, and again on February 14, 2011; an indication that the rectifier was\nnot functioning properly. The PHMSA field inspection on March 1, 2011, found a zero\ncurrent output on the same San Mateo system rectifier, confirming that the rectifier was\nnot operating properly. Yet, Amerigas had not initiated a prompt remedial action to\ncorrect the deficiency.\n2. §192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(d) Each operator shall take prompt remedial action to correct any deficiencies\nindicated by the monitoring.\nAmerigas did not take prompt remedial action to correct deficiencies, i.e. unsatisfactory\nlevels of cathodic protection indicated by low1\npipe-to-soil (p/s) readings found during\ncathodic protection surveys it conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010.\nThe operator did not correct the following deficiencies indicated by p/s monitoring:\nArlington 610 System\n2534 Lansdown Drive: - 710 mV (11/18/08); - 680 mV (11/23/09)\n7335 Merrill Road: - 610 mV (11/10/08); -500 mV (11/29/10)\n2472 Eastrill Drive: - 420 mV (11/23/2009)\n2481 Eastrill Drive: - 540 mV (11/29/2010)\n2658 Woolery Drive: - 630mV (11/23/2009); - 680 mV (11/29/2010)\nIn addition, p/s tests at selected test stations conducted on the Arlington 610 system\nduring the PHMSA inspection on March 1, 2011, revealed low p/s readings as follows:\n2490 Woolery Drive: - 318 mV; Woolery creek crossing: - 710 mV\nSan Jose System\n4462 Naranja Drive: - 480 mV (11/2010)\n4332 Naranja Drive: - 690 mV (11/2010)\n4015 Habana Street: - 840 mV (11/2010)\n3977 Habana Street: - 460 mV (11/2009)\n8137 Fresca Street: - 610 mV (11/2009)\n8042 Naranja Drive: - 580 mV (11/2009)\n8058 Argentine Drive: - 690 mV (10/26/2009); - 670 mV (2/2/2011)\nIn addition, p/s tests at selected test stations conducted on the San Jose system during\nthe PHMSA inspection on March 1, 2011, revealed low p/s readings as follows:\n7854 Praver Drive West: - 500 mV\n7808 Praver Drive West: - 500 mV\n4462 Naranja Drive: - 780 mV\n1 The criteria for cathodic protection are contained in 49 CFR Part 192, Appendix D. The criteria being\nreferenced in this letter is negative (cathodic) voltage of at least 850mV with reference to a saturated copper-\ncopper sulfate half cell. Accordingly, a “low” p/s reading is a reading less negative than 850mV.\n2\n\n\n\nSan Mateo System\n266 Claudia Drive - 840 mV (12/10)\n261 Claudia Drive: - 750 mV (12/10)\n11239 Inez Drive: - 510 mV (10/09)\n255 Balsden Road: - 500 mV (10/09)\n11307 Renee Drive: - 530 mV (10/09)\n11536 Princess Lane: - 440 mV (10/09)\nIn addition, p/s tests at selected test stations conducted on the San Mateo system during\nthe PHMSA inspection on March 1, 2011, revealed low p/s readings as follows:\n11501 Inez Drive: - 482 mV\n11320 Renee Drive: - 502 mV\n266 Claudia Drive: - 780 mV\nArlington 7 System\n3022 Red Oak Drive: - 750 mV (11/10/2009); - 570 mV (2/11/2010)\nIn addition, p/s tests at selected test stations conducted on the Arlington 7 system during\nthe PHMSA inspection on March 1, 2011, revealed low p/s readings as follows:\n3022 Red Oak Drive: - 438 mV\nTest station outside the fenced tank farm: - 630 mV\n3. §192.467 External corrosion control: Electrical isolation.\n(a) Each buried or submerged pipeline must be electrically isolated from other\nunderground metallic structures, unless the pipeline and the other structures are\nelectrically interconnected and cathodically protected as a single unit.\n... (d) Inspection and electrical tests must be made to assure that electrical\nisolation is adequate.\nAmerigas did not inspect or conduct electrical tests to assure that electrical isolation was\nadequate for its 1¼-inch steel pipe inside a 2-inch casing at the Woolery Creek Crossing\non the Arlington 610 system. During the PHMSA field inspection on March 1, 2011, a\nlow pipe-to-soil potential of - 770 mV was measured on the pipe and a casing-to-soil\npotential of - 710 mV was measured on the casing. Cathodic protection readings within\n100 mV on a casing and carrier pipe could indicate a possible electrical short between\nthe two pipes. Yet, Amerigas did not provide any records to demonstrate that it had\ninspected or electrically tested for adequate electrical isolation between the pipe and the\ncasing at this location.\n4. §192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(a) Each operator must inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed\nto the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion, as follows:\nIf the pipeline is located: Onshore.... Then the frequency of inspection is:\nAt least once every 3 calendar years, but with intervals not exceeding 39 months.\n3\n\n\n\nAmerigas did not inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed to the\natmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion within the prescribed time intervals.\nThe atmospheric corrosion monitoring on the Arlington 610 system was conducted in\nAugust 2002 and November 2008, which exceeds the three calendar year time limit.\n5. §192.491 Corrosion control records.\n(a) Each operator shall maintain records or maps to show the location of\ncathodically protected piping, cathodic protection facilities, galvanic anodes, and\nneighboring structures bonded to the cathodic protection system. Records or maps\nshowing a stated number of anodes, installed in a stated manner or spacing, need\nnot show specific distances to each buried anode.\n(b) Each record or map required by paragraph (a) of this section must be retained\nfor as long as the pipeline remains in service.\n(c) Each operator shall maintain a record of each test, survey, or inspection\nrequired by this subpart in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of\ncorrosion control measures or that a corrosive condition does not exist. These\nrecords must be retained for at least 5 years, except that records related to\n§§192.465(a) and (e) and 192.475(b) must be retained for as long as the pipeline\nremains in service.\nAmerigas did not have a revised and updated system map showing the location of\ngalvanic anodes, rectifiers and cathodically protected piping.\n6. §192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline, a manual\nof written procedures for conducting operations and maintenance activities and for\nemergency response. This manual must be reviewed and updated by the operator\nat intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least one each calendar year. This\nmanual must be prepared before operations of a pipeline system commence.\nAppropriate parts of the manual must be kept at locations where operations and\nmaintenance activities are conducted.\nAmerigas did not properly prepare and follow a manual of written procedures for\nconducting operations and maintenance activities and for emergency response. The\noperator did not have written procedures to address the following:\n− A time frame for prompt remedial actions in the case of unsatisfactory levels of\ncathodic protection,\n− Internal corrosion,\n− Alternating current (A/C) interference,\n− Stray currents,\n− Critical bonds and interference bonds; and\n− Shorted casings.\nUnder 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of\n4\n\n\n\n$1,000,000 for any related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and\nsupporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional\nenforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct\nthe items identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Amerigas Propane LP being\nsubject to additional enforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer\nto CPF 2-2011-0004W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this\nenforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any\nportion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b),\nalong with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document\nwith the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of\nwhy you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C.\n552(b).\nSincerely,\nWayne T. Lemoi\nDirector, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPHMSA Southern Region\ncc: Michael Johnson\nManager\n855 Talleyrand Ave.\nJacksonville, FL 32206\nJoe Rodriguez\nArea Manager\n29216 Hwy. 27\nDundee, FL 33838\n5","truncated":false,"body_characters":10895}