{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32022061NOPV","title":"ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP) — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-12-22","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 191.29(b), 192.605(a), 192.709(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022061nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022061nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022061nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32022061NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, L.L.C. (SPECTRA ENERGY PARTNERS, LP). PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 191.29(b),  192.605(a),  192.709(c). The case was opened on 2022-12-22 and is reported as closed as of 2023-06-06. Proposed civil penalty: $193,700. Assessed civil penalty: $193,700. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32022061NOPV_Clarification Letter_06142023_(21-201318).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_Clarification%20Letter_06142023_(21-201318).pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_Clarification Letter_06142023_(21-201318)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_Clarification%20Letter_06142023_(21-201318)_text.pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_Final Order_06062023_(21-201318).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_Final%20Order_06062023_(21-201318).pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_Final Order_06062023_(21-201318)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_Final%20Order_06062023_(21-201318)_text.pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_01202023_(21-201318).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_01202023_(21-201318).pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_PCP PCO_12222022_(21-201318).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_PCP%20PCO_12222022_(21-201318).pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_PCP PCO_12222022_(21-201318)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022061NOPV/32022061NOPV_PCP%20PCO_12222022_(21-201318)_text.pdf\n\n32022061NOPV_Final Order_06062023_(21-201318)_text.pdf\n\nJune 6, 2023\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: cynthia.hansen@enbridge.com\nMs. Cynthia Hansen\nExecutive Vice President and President\nGas Transmission and Midstream\nEnbridge Inc.\n915 North Eldridge Parkway, Ste. 1100\nHouston, Texas 77079\nRe: CPF No. 3-2022-061-NOPV\nDear Ms. Hansen:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case to Algonquin Gas\nTransmission, LLC, a subsidiary of Enbridge Inc. It makes findings of violation, assesses a civil\npenalty of $193,700, and finds that the proposed actions to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations have been completed. The penalty payment terms are set forth in the Final Order.\nWhen the civil penalty has been paid this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final\nOrder by e-mail is effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt as\nprovided 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 (Final Order)\ncc: Mr. Gregory A. Ochs, Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMr. Nathan Atanu, Manager, Operational Compliance, Enbridge\nnathan.atanu@enbridge.com\n\n\n\nMr. Garrett Wilkie, Director, Operational Excellence, Enbridge Inc.,\ngarrett.wilkie@enbridge.com\nCONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT REQUEST\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n____________________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nAlgonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, ) CPF No. 3-2022-061-NOPV\na subsidiary of Enbridge Inc., )\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom May 24 through December 8, 2021, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS), conducted an inspection of Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC’s (AGT or Respondent)\nnatural gas pipeline facilities in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and\nMassachusetts. AGT operates an over 1,100-mile natural gas transmission pipeline system,\ndelivering natural gas from the Gulf Coast to New England.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated December 22, 2022, a Notice of Probable Violation (Notice). In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that AGT committed three violations of 49\nC.F.R. Part 192, proposed assessing a civil penalty of $193,700, and proposed ordering\nRespondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also included\nthree warning items pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205, which warned AGT to correct the probable\nviolations or face possible future enforcement action.\nEnbridge Inc. (Enbridge) responded to the Notice on behalf of AGT by letter dated January 20,\n2023 (Response). The Response neither admitted nor denied the factual allegations described in\nthe Notice, but did contest one of the items. The Response contained a description of the\ncorrective actions taken by AGT to address the items cited in the Notice and requested\nconsideration of a reduced civil penalty because those actions were taken prior to the issuance of\nthe Notice. Respondent 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 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a), which states:\n\n\n\n§ 192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and\nemergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline, a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting operations and maintenance\nactivities and for emergency response. For transmission lines, the manual\nmust also include procedures for handling abnormal operations. This\nmanual must be reviewed and updated by the operator at intervals not\nexceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year. This manual\nmust be prepared before operations of a pipeline system commence.\nAppropriate parts of the manual must be kept at locations where operations\nand maintenance activities are conducted.\nThe Notice alleged AGT failed to periodically review and update its manual of written\nprocedures for conducting operations, maintenance, and emergency response activities.\nSpecifically, the Notice alleged AGT failed to review and update its Hubline Post Construction\nOperations and Maintenance Plan (Hubline O&M Plan) at intervals not exceeding 15 months,\nbut at least once each calendar year.\nIn the Response, Enbridge did not contest this allegation and stated that following PHMSA’s\ninspection, AGT incorporated the Hubline O&M Plan requirements into its Integrity\nManagement Program (IMP) and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), which are reviewed at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year.\nAccordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49\nC.F.R. § 192.605(a) by failing to periodically review and update its Hubline O&M Plan at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year.\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a), which states:\n§ 192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and\nemergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline, a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting operations and maintenance\nactivities and for emergency response. For transmission lines, the manual\nmust also include procedures for handling abnormal operations. This\nmanual must be reviewed and updated by the operator at intervals not\nexceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year. This manual\nmust be prepared before operations of a pipeline system commence.\nAppropriate parts of the manual must be kept at locations where operations\nand maintenance activities are conducted.\nThe Notice alleged AGT failed to follow its manual of written procedures for conducting\noperations and maintenance activities and for emergency response. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged AGT failed to demonstrate that it performed required inspections or re-inspections at\nrequired intervals of its subsea pipeline located in Boston Harbor.\n\n\n\nIn the Response, Enbridge stated “AGT has performed the underwater surveys in accordance\nwith the Hubline O&M Plan” and that AGT has now incorporated the Hubline underwater\nsurvey requirements into the IMP and SOP to ensure completion of subsequent surveys.1\nEnbridge stated surveys were completed on December 18, 2021, and September 12, 2022.\nThe Hubline O&M Plan includes requirements for depth of cover surveys as well as subsequent\nsubsea surveys at intervals every five or ten years thereafter. It also includes subsea inspections\nto be performed every five years for six separate “Rock/Mat Backfill” structure locations. While\nEnbridge stated it performed subsea surveys on December 18, 2021, and September 12, 2022, in\nthe Response, Enbridge did not provide evidence demonstrating that subsea inspections were\nconducted in accordance with the intervals required by the Hubline O&M Plan. Further, these\ninspections were conducted after the conclusion of PHMSA’s 2021 inspection that is the subject\nof the Notice.\nAccordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49\nC.F.R. § 195.605(a) by failing to demonstrate that it performed required inspections of its subsea\npipeline located in Boston Harbor.\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a), which states:\n§ 192.605 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and\nemergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline, a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting operations and maintenance\nactivities and for emergency response. For transmission lines, the manual\nmust also include procedures for handling abnormal operations. This\nmanual must be reviewed and updated by the operator at intervals not\nexceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year. This manual\nmust be prepared before operations of a pipeline system commence.\nAppropriate parts of the manual must be kept at locations where operations\nand maintenance activities are conducted.\nThe Notice alleged Respondent failed to follow its manual of written procedures for conducting\noperations and maintenance activities and for emergency response. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged Respondent failed to comply with its SOP 1-6010 (rev. 11/15/2018), in calendar years\n2018 through 2020 when it did not use leak detection equipment to conduct a leak-survey of a\nparking lot with areas exceeding 100 feet of paved cover at the intersection of Sebethe Drive and\nBerlin Road, in Cromwell, Connecticut.\nIn the Response, Enbridge stated AGT incorporated the instrumented leak survey into AGT’s\nwork management system for the identified parking lot, establishing how the instrumented leak\nsurvey is planned, scheduled, executed, completed, and documented. Enbridge did not argue that\nsurveys were conducted in calendar years 2018 through 2020 or present evidence demonstrating\nthose surveys were completed. Enbridge stated leak surveys were completed in April and\nOctober 2022, with no indication of any leaks at this site.\n1 Response, at 3.\n\n\n\nAccordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49\nC.F.R. § 195.605(a) by failing to comply with its procedures when it did not conduct required\nleak surveys in calendar years 2018 through 2020.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\nactions against Respondent.\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.2\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 $193,700 for the violations cited above.\nItem 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $76,300 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.605(a), for failing periodically review and update its Hubline O&M plan at intervals not\nexceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year.\nEnbridge neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence justifying a reduction in the\nproposed penalty, but did state it took actions to correct he noncompliance after PHMSA’s\ninspection. While PHMSA appreciates Respondent’s swift corrective measures to comply with\nthe pipeline safety regulations, such actions do not warrant the reduction of a proposed civil\npenalty because they were taken after PHMSA had already identified the violation.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $76,300 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a).\nItem 3: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $58,700 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.605(a) for failing to demonstrate that it performed required inspections of its subsea\npipeline located in Boston Harbor.\nEnbridge contested the allegation but did not present any evidence justifying a reduction in the\nproposed penalty, but did state it took actions to correct the noncompliance after PHMSA’s\ninspection. While PHMSA appreciates Respondent’s swift corrective measures to comply with\n2 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 C.F.R. § 190.223 for adjusted amounts.\n\n\n\nthe pipeline safety regulations, such actions do not warrant the reduction of a proposed civil\npenalty because they were taken after PHMSA had already identified the violation.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $58,700 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a).\nItem 4: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $58,700 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.605(a) for failing to comply with its procedures when it did not conduct required leak\nsurveys in calendar years 2018 through 2020.\nEnbridge neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence justifying a reduction in the\nproposed penalty, but did state it took actions to correct the noncompliance after PHMSA’s\ninspection. While PHMSA appreciates Respondent’s swift corrective measures to comply with\nthe pipeline safety regulations, such actions do not warrant the reduction of a proposed civil\npenalty because they were taken after PHMSA had already identified the violation.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $58,700 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a).\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 $193,700.\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days after receipt of this Final Order.\nFederal regulations (49 C.F.R. § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer\nthrough the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S.\nTreasury. Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire\ntransfers should be directed to: Financial Operations Division (AMK-325), Federal Aviation\nAdministration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 S MacArthur Blvd, Oklahoma City,\nOklahoma 79169. The Financial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8845.\nFailure to pay the civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate in\naccordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3717, 31 C.F.R. § 901.9 and 49 C.F.R. § 89.23. Pursuant to those\nsame authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if payment\nis not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty may result\nin referral of the\nCOMPLIANCE ACTIONS\nThe Director has indicated that Respondent has already completed the actions proposed in the\nNotice to correct the violations described in Items 3 and 4. Therefore, it is not necessary to\ninclude the proposed compliance terms in this Final Order.\n\n\n\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 1, 5, 6, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 192 but did not\npropose civil penalties or compliance orders for these items. Therefore, these are considered to\nbe warning items under § 190.205. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.19(b) (Item 1) - Respondent’s alleged failure to submit required\ninformation for the Medway Station pipeline lateral to the National Pipeline Mapping\nSystem within the required timeframe;\n49 C.F.R. § 192.605(a) (Item 5) - Respondent’s alleged failure to provide inspection\nrecords for certain valves for calendar years 2018 through 2020; and\n49 C.F.R. § 192.709(c) (Item 6) - Respondent’s alleged failure to provide records of\ninspection associated with certain station inspections for calendar year 2020.\nEnbridge stated in the Response that AGT has taken actions to address the cited warning items.\nUnder § 190.205, PHMSA does not adjudicate warning items to determine whether a probable\nviolation occurred. If OPS finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection,\nRespondent may be subject to 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 any corrective actions, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon\nrequest, grants a stay.\nThe terms and conditions of this order are effective upon service in accordance with 49 C.F.R.\n§ 190.5.\nJune 6, 2023\n___________________________________ _________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":18908}