{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32022045NOPV","title":"SOUTHERN STAR CENTRAL GAS PIPELINE, INC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-04-28","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.631(b)(5), 192.631(c)(1), 192.631(e)(2), 192.631(h)(6), 192.631(j)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022045nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022045nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022045nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32022045NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving SOUTHERN STAR CENTRAL GAS PIPELINE, INC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.631(b)(5),  192.631(c)(1),  192.631(e)(2),  192.631(h)(6),  192.631(j)(1). The case was opened on 2022-04-28 and is reported as closed as of 2022-11-04. Proposed civil penalty: $55,800. Assessed civil penalty: $27,900. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32022045NOPV_Closure Letter_11042022_(21-201001).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_Closure%20Letter_11042022_(21-201001).pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_Closure Letter_11042022_(21-201001)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_Closure%20Letter_11042022_(21-201001)_text.pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_Final Order_10172022_(21-201001).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_Final%20Order_10172022_(21-201001).pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_Final Order_10172022_(21-201001)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_Final%20Order_10172022_(21-201001)_text.pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_05272022_(21-201001).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_05272022_(21-201001).pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_PCP PCO_04282022_(21-201001).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_PCP%20PCO_04282022_(21-201001).pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_PCP PCO_04282022_(21-201001)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022045NOPV/32022045NOPV_PCP%20PCO_04282022_(21-201001)_text.pdf\n\n32022045NOPV_Closure Letter_11042022_(21-201001)_text.pdf\n\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: shawn.patterson@southernstar.com and\ncraig.thomas@southernstar.com\nNovember 4, 2022\nMr. Shawn L. Patterson\nPresident and Chief Executive Officer\nSouthern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.\n4700 State Route 56\nBox 20010\nOwensboro, Kentucky 42301\nRe: CPF 3-2022-045-NOPV\nDear Mr. Patterson:\nOn October 17, 2022, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)\nissued to Southern Star a final order in the above-referenced case. This Order included a\nCompliance Order and Civil Penalty assessment. Based on our review of the documentation you\nprovided and confirmation of payment of the civil penalty, it has been determined that you have\ncomplied with the terms of this Order.\nAccordingly, this case is now closed, and no further action is contemplated with respect to the\nmatters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nGregory A. Ochs\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Craig Thomas, Compliance Manager, craig.thomas@southernstar.com\n\n32022045NOPV_Final Order_10172022_(21-201001)_text.pdf\n\nOctober 17, 2022\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: shawn.patterson@southernstar.com\nMr. Shawn L. Patterson\nPresident and Chief Executive Officer\nSouthern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.\n4700 State Route 56\nP.O. Box 20010\nOwensboro, Kentucky 42304\nRe: CPF No. 3-2022-045-NOPV\nDear Mr. Patterson:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation, assesses a civil penalty of $27,900, and specifies actions that need to be taken by\nSouthern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. This is\nto acknowledge receipt of payment of the full penalty amount, by wire transfer, dated May 27,\n2022. When the terms of the compliance order are completed, as determined by the Director,\nCentral Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by e-mail is\neffective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt as provided under 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nAlan K. Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Gregory E. Ochs, Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMr. Craig Thomas, Manager, Integrity Management and PHMSA Compliance, Southern\nStar Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., craig.thomas@southernstar.com\n\n\n\nMr. Mark Luckett, Lead Attorney, Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.,\nmark.luckett@southernstar.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\n_____________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nSouthern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., ) CPF No. 3-2022-045-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n_____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom October 18 through November 8, 2021, 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 a pipeline safety inspection of the control room records and procedures of\nSouthern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. (Southern Star or Respondent) in Owensboro, Kentucky.\nSouthern Star operates approximately 5,800 miles of natural gas transmission pipelines in the\ncentral United States.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated April 28, 2022, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and\nProposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice\nproposed finding that Southern Star had committed four violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 192,\nproposed assessing a civil penalty of $55,800 for the alleged violations, and proposed ordering\nRespondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also included\nan additional warning item pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205, which warned the operator to\ncorrect the probable violation or face possible future enforcement action\nSouthern Star responded to the Notice by letter dated May 27, 2022 (Response). The company\ncontested one of the allegations and offered additional information in response to the Notice.\nRespondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(b)(5), which states:\n1 See Southern Star website, available at https://www.southernstar.com/ (last accessed Oct. 5, 2022).\n\n\n\n§ 192.631 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(b) Roles and responsibilities. Each operator must define the roles and\nresponsibilities of a controller during, normal, abnormal, and emergency\noperator conditions. To provide for a controller’s prompt and appropriate\nresponse to operating conditions, an operator must define each of the\nfollowing:\n(1) . . .\n(5) The roles, responsibilities and qualifications of others with the\nauthority to direct or supersede the specific technical actions of a controller.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(b)(5) by failing to define the\nroles, responsibilities, and qualifications of others with the authority to direct or supersede the\nspecific technical actions of a controller. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Southern Star’s\nwritten control room management procedures and controller training provided conflicting\ninformation on who could direct or supersede the specific technical actions of controllers.\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. § 192.631(b)(5) for failing to define\nthe roles, responsibilities, and qualifications of others with the authority to direct or supersede\nthe specific technical actions of a controller.\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(c)(1), which states:\n§ 192.631 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(c) Provide adequate information. Each operator must provide its\ncontrollers with the information, tools, processes and procedures necessary\nfor the controllers to carry out the roles and responsibilities the operator has\ndefined by performing each of the following:\n(1) Implement section 1, 4, 8, 9, 11.1, and 11.3 of API RP 1165\n(incorporated by reference, see § 192.7) whenever a SCADA system is\nadded, expanded or replaced, unless the operator demonstrates that certain\nprovisions of sections 1, 4, 8, 9, 11.1 and 11.3 of API RP 1165 are not\npractical for the SCADA system used;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(c)(1) by failing to implement\nsections 1, 4, 8, 9, 11.1, and 11.3 of API RP 1165 on its SCADA system, or demonstrating that\ncertain provisions of these sections are not practical for the SCADA system used. Specifically,\nthe Notice alleged that although Southern Star developed and built its SCADA system to API RP\n1165, it failed to perform an audit to verify that the SCADA operating system met the section\nrequirements set forth in § 192.631(c)(1).\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. § 192.631(c)(1) for failing to\nimplement the requisite sections of API RP 1165 on its SCADA system.\n\n\n\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(e)(2), which states:\n§ 192.631 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(e) Alarm management. Each operator using a SCADA system must\nhave a written alarm management plan to provide for effective controller\nresponse to alarms. An operator’s plan must include provisions to:\n(1) . . .\n(2) Identify at least once each calendar month points affecting safety\nthat have been taken off scan in the SCADA host, have had alarms inhibited,\ngenerated false alarms, or that have had forced or manual values for periods\nof time exceeding that required for associated maintenance or operating\nactivities;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(e)(2) by failing to identify at\nleast once each calendar month points affecting safety that have been taken off scan in the\nSCADA host, have had alarms inhibited, generated false alarms, or that have had forced or\nmanual values for periods of time exceeding that required for associated maintenance or\noperating activities. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Southern Star failed to review false\nalarms for the years 2019 and 2020.\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. § 192.631(e)(2) for failing to identify\nat least once each calendar month points affecting safety that have generated false alarms for\nassociated maintenance or operating activities.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nWITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(h)(6), which states:\n§ 192.631 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(h) Training. Each operator must establish a controller training program\nand review the training program content to identify potential improvements\nat least once each calendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months.\nAn operator’s program must provide for training each controller to carry out\nthe roles and responsibilities defined by the operator. In addition, the\ntraining program must include the following elements:\n(1) . . .\n(6) Control room team training and exercises that include both\n\n\n\ncontrollers and other individuals, defined by the operator, who would\nreasonably be expected to operationally collaborate with controllers\n(control room personnel) during normal, abnormal or emergency situations.\nOperations must comply with the team training requirements under this\nparagraph by no later than January 23, 2018.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.631(h)(6) by failing to conduct\ncontrol room team training and exercises that included both controllers and other individuals,\ndefined by the operator, who would reasonably be expected to operationally collaborate with\ncontrollers during normal, abnormal or emergency situations. Specifically, the Notice alleged\nthat Southern Star failed to conduct control room team training that included at least one\ncontroller or control room representative during six training sessions in 2018 and 2019.\nIn its Response, Southern Star contested this item and submitted additional information.\nSpecifically, the company provided additional documentation demonstrating that control room\npersonnel were present during team training in 2018 and 2019.2\nIn a recommendation for final action submitted pursuant to § 190.209(b)(7), the Director\nrecommended withdrawing the alleged violation of § 192.631(h)(6) based on this additional\ninformation. Accordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find no basis for finding a\nviolation of § 192.631(h)(6). Based upon the foregoing, I hereby order that Item 4 be withdrawn.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations.3\nIn determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I\nmust consider the following criteria: the nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,\nincluding adverse impact on the environment; the degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history\nof Respondent’s prior offenses; any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue\ndoing business; the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations; and self-disclosure or actions to correct a violation prior to discovery by PHMSA.\nIn addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction\nbecause of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice\nproposed a total civil penalty of $55,800 for the violations cited above.\nItem 3: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $27,900 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.631(e)(2), for failing to review false alarms for the years 2019 and 2020. Southern Star\nneither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument justifying a reduction in\n2 See Response, at Attachments 1-5. Southern Star further explained in its Response that it did not hold a team\ntraining on one of the dates cited in the Notice. Id., at 2.\n3 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 C.F.R. § 190.223 for adjusted amounts.\n\n\n\nor elimination of the proposed penalty. Although this violation minimally impacted pipeline\nsafety, the operator failed to comply with an applicable requirement and did not provide a\nreasonable justification for the noncompliance. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and\nconsidered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $27,900 for violation of\n49 C.F.R. § 192.631(e)(2).\nItem 4: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $27,900 for Respondent’s alleged violation of 49\nC.F.R. § 192.631(h)(6). Since this alleged violation has been withdrawn, the proposed penalty is\nnot assessed.\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nItems cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $27,900, which amount was paid\nin full by wire transfer on May 27, 2022.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1 and 2 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 192.631(b)(5) and 192.631(c)(1), 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 § 192.631(b)(5) (Item 1), Respondent must\nprovide records of completed training for controllers and those identified as “others”\non the policy of disallowing others who have authority to direct or supersede the\nspecific technical actions of a controller within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order.\n2. With respect to the violation of § 192.631(c)(1) (Item 2), Respondent must verify\nthrough audit or other means that its SCADA system complies with sections 1, 4, 8,\n9, 11.1, and 11.3 of API RP 1165 within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order.\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.\nPHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director. It is\nrequested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nnot to exceed $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (see 49 C.F.R. § 190.223), for each violation for\n\n\n\neach day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a\ndistrict court of the United States.\nWARNING ITEM\nWith respect to Item 5, the Notice alleged probable violation of Part 192, but identified it as a\nwarning item pursuant to § 190.205. The warning was for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.631(j)(1)( (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to maintain\nfor review during inspection records that demonstrate compliance with the\nrequirements of § 192.631.\nIf OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject\nto future enforcement action.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final\nOrder to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey\nAvenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of\nChief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. The written petition must be received no later than\n20 days after receipt of the Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a\nstatement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The filing of a\npetition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of the\norder, including corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon\nrequest, grants a stay.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nOctober 17, 2022\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":19294}