# THE SAVOY ON PALM — Warning Letter - **operation:** document - **citation:** CPF 220130006W - **title:** THE SAVOY ON PALM — Warning Letter - **source type:** enforcement - **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration - **status:** historical - **official:** true - **published on:** 2013-04-17 - **effective on:** Not available - **summary:** CLOSED warning letter citing 192.625(f), 192.723(a), 192.747. - **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220130006w.json - **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220130006w.md - **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220130006w - **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/220130006W **body:** Warning Letter involving THE SAVOY ON PALM. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.625(f), 192.723(a), 192.747. The case was opened on 2013-04-17 and is reported as closed as of 2013-04-17. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status. Official case documents: 220130006W_warning letter_04172013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220130006W/220130006W_warning%20letter_04172013.pdf 220130006W_warning letter_04172013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220130006W/220130006W_warning%20letter_04172013_text.pdf 220130006W_warning letter_04172013_text.pdf WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED April 17, 2013 Mr. Bill Veal Building Manager The Savoy on Palm 401 S. Palm Avenue Sarasota, FL 34236 CPF 2-2013-0006W Dear Mr. Veal: On February14, 2013, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Southern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, inspected The Savoy on Palm master meter and downstream piping and facilities at 401 S. Palm Avenue, Sarasota, Florida. As a result of the inspection, it appears that The Savoy on Palm has committed probable violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the probable violations are as follows: 1. §192.625 Odorization of gas. ... (f) To assure the proper concentration of odorant in accordance with this section, each operator must conduct periodic sampling of combustible gases using an instrument capable of determining the percentage of gas in air at which the odor becomes readily detectable. Operators of master meter systems may comply with this requirement by- (1) Receiving written verification from their gas source that the gas has the proper concentration of odorant; and (2) Conducting periodic "sniff" tests at the extremities of the system to confirm that the gas contains odorant. The Savoy on Palm did not present to the PHMSA inspector any records to demonstrate that it had assured the proper concentration of odorant in its pipeline system by receiving written verification from its gas source that the gas has the proper concentration of odorant or by conducting periodic "sniff" tests at the extremities of the system to confirm that the gas contains odorant. 2. §192.723 Distribution systems: Leakage surveys. (a) Each operator of a distribution system shall conduct periodic leakage surveys in accordance with this section. (b) The type and scope of the leakage control program must be determined by the nature of the operations and the local conditions, but it must meet the following minimum requirements: ... (2) A leakage survey with leak detector equipment must be conducted outside business districts as frequently as necessary, but at least once every 5 calendar years at intervals not exceeding 63 months. However, for cathodically unprotected distribution lines subject to § 192.465(e) on which electrical surveys for corrosion are impractical, a leakage survey must be conducted at least once every 3 calendar years at intervals not exceeding 39 months. The Savoy on Palm did not present to the PHMSA inspector any records to demonstrate that it had conducted a leakage survey with leak detector equipment at its 11 story buildings with 24 residential units at least once every 5 calendar years and at intervals not exceeding 63 months. 3. §192.747 Valve maintenance: Distribution systems. (a) Each valve, the use of which may be necessary for the safe operation of a distribution system, must be checked and serviced at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year. (b) Each operator must take prompt remedial action to correct any valve found inoperable, unless the operator designates an alternative valve. The Savoy on Palm did not present to the PHMSA inspector any records to demonstrate that it had checked and serviced its shut off (or key valve) which may be necessary for the safe operation of its distribution system at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year. Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, The Savoy on Palm is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $ 200,000 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for a related series of violations. For violations occurring prior to January 4, 2012, the maximum penalty may not exceed $100,000 per violation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $1,000,000 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 will result in The Savoy on Palm, 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 2-2013-0006W. 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 2 why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). Sincerely, Wayne T. Lemoi Director, Office of Pipeline Safety PHMSA Southern Region 3 - **truncated:** false - **body characters:** 5710