{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-20-0007","title":"IBEW Local 1245 — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2020-04-24","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-20-0007 response to IBEW Local 1245 concerning 192.615.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-20-0007.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-20-0007.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-20-0007","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/pipeline/interpretations/73721/ibew-local-1245-pi-20-0007-04-24-2020-part-192615.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nApril 24, 2020\nMr. Alexander Pacheco\nGeneral Counsel\nIBEW Local 1245\n30 Orange Tree Circle\nVacaville, CA 95687\nDear Mr. Pacheco:\nIn a letter to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), dated\nFebruary 14, 2020, you requested an interpretation of the federal pipeline safety regulations in\n49 CFR § 192.615 with respect to customer service representatives (CSRs) working in Pacific\nGas & Electric (PG&E) call centers. In your letter you state, “Under 49 CFR 192.615, any\nperson who performs on a gas pipeline a regulated operating, maintenance, or emergency-\nresponse function is subject to DOT-mandated drug testing.” You add that the drug testing is\nrequired “under § 192.615.”\nTo clarify, PHMSA’s Drug and Alcohol Testing regulations are codified in 49 CFR Part 199, not\nin Part 192. The specific regulations requiring drug and alcohol (D&A) testing include § 199.1.\n§ 199.1 Scope.\nThis part requires operators of pipeline facilities subject to part 192, 193, or 195 of this\nchapter to test covered employees for the presence of prohibited drugs and alcohol.\nIn addition, § 199.3 specifies the meaning of “covered employee” and “covered function.\n”\n§ 199.3 Definitions.\nAs used in this part -\nCovered employee, employee, or individual to be tested means a person who performs a\ncovered function, including persons employed by operators, contractors engaged by\noperators, and persons employed by such contractors.\nCovered function means an operations, maintenance, or emergency-response function\nregulated by part 192, 193, or 195 of this chapter that is performed on a pipeline or on an\nLNG facility.\nPlease note that the definition of “covered function” refers to Parts 192, 193, and 195 for\nclarification as to what specific operations, maintenance, and emergency-response functions\nrequire “covered employees” to be D&A tested per Part 199.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CFR\nParts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts\npresented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations are not generally applicable, do not create legally-enforceable rights or\nobligations, and are provided to help the specific requestor understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<>>\n\n2\nThe code section you referenced, § 192.615, requires each operator of a gas pipeline to establish\nwritten emergency plans. Those written emergency plans must include the emergency-response\nfunctions that would trigger the D&A testing of “covered employees” under Part 199.\nYour concern pertains to CSRs working in PG&E call centers. As you noted in your letter,\nPHMSA addressed this issue in interpretation PL-90-003 dated February 13, 1990. That\ninterpretation states that service clerks responsible for performing the following three things are\n“covered employees” subject to D&A testing:\n1. receiving telephone notices of gas leaks,\n2. identifying those notices that require immediate response by the company; and\n3. dispatching personnel to the scene.\nIn reviewing the PG&E CSR processes you enclosed in your letter, PHMSA believes that in each\ncase the “dispatching of personnel to the scene” function (item # 3 above) is not performed by\nthe CSR but by PG&E’s Dispatch Department. Thus, PHMSA finds that the CSRs working in\nPG&E call centers are not performing all three of the stated functions and, therefore, are not\n“covered employees” subject to D&A testing.\nNotwithstanding the above, nothing in Part 199 prohibits an employer from D&A testing any of\nits employees using non-DOT procedures, including those employees already subject to D&A\ntesting under PHMSA regulations.\nIf we can be of further assistance, please contact Tewabe Asebe at 202-366-5523.\nSincerely,\nJOHN A\nGALE\nDigitally signed\nby JOHN A\nGALE\nDate: 2020.04.24\n13:03:50 -04'00'\nJohn A. Gale\nDirector, Office of Standards\nand Rulemaking\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CFR\nParts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts\npresented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations are not generally applicable, do not create legally-enforceable rights or\nobligations, and are provided to help the specific requestor understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<>>\n\nFEB 2 t 2020\n30 Orange Tree Cir.\nVacaville, CA 95687\nMain Phone: (707) 452-2700\nFax: (707) 452-2701\nTOM DALZELL, BUSINESS MANAGER\nCECELIA DE LA TORRE, PRESIDENT\nFebruary 14, 2020\nVIA U.S. MAIL\nAlan K. Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator for Pipeline Safety\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nRE: Interpretation of CFR 49 § 192.615 with respect to customer service representatives\nworking in call centers.\nDear Associate Administrator Mayberry:\nUnder 49 CFR § 192.615, any person who performs on a gas pipeline a regulated operating,\nmaintenance, or emergency-response function is subject to DOT-mandated drug testing. As\nfurther clarified by the Office of Pipeline Safety in its Interpretation Response #PI-90-003 ( a\ncopy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A), a \"service clerk\" who \"is responsible for\nreceiving telephone notices of gas leaks, identifying those notices that require immediate\nresponse by the company, and dispatching personnel to the scene would be subject to drug\ntesting\" under Section 192.615.\nThe purpose of this letter is to request guidance regarding the applicability of Section 192.615 to\na specific classification of employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical\nWorkers, Local 1245 (\"Local 1245\")-i.e., a customer service representative (\"CSR\") working\nwithin a high-volume telephone call center-within a bargaining unit comprised of clerical\nemployees working at Pacific Gas & Electric (\"PG&E\"). Local 1245 and PG&E are jointly\nsubmitting this letter in the hopes that a definitive response from your office will help the parties\navoid having to submit this issue of statutory interpretation to a labor arbitrator with no specific\nexpertise in this area.\nLike the \"service clerk\" described above, PG&E call-center customer service representatives are\nresponsible for receiving telephone calls reporting gas leaks from customers and/or the public,\nalong with handling many other customer inquiries. In some instances, a caller's primary\npurpose for calling PG&E may not have been to report a gas leak. However, as part of their\nextensive, six-week training course, CSRs are specifically trained in how to ask probing\nquestions of customers whose primary purpose for calling ( e.g., an unusually high gas bill) might\n\n<<>>\n\nbe caused by a gas leak. Upon receiving a report of a gas leak or after helping a customer\nidentify that they may have a gas leak, the information gathered by the CSR and the actions they\nshould take in to response to the possible gas leak are carefully dictated by PG&E policy (as set\nout in detail below). The parties would like to know whether this response protocol constitutes a\nsafety-sensitive function that would render these employees a covered classification under\nSection 192.615, and therefore subject to DOT-mandated drug testing.\nWhen a PG&E call-center customer service representative receives a call 1 from a customer or from\nthe public, CSRs are trained to ask probing questions to determine whether the caller may have a\npossible gas leak and if so, what type of gas leak may be involved (i.e., in the customer's house, at\nthe meter, at another exterior location nearby, etc.). The CSR then must process the call and record\nthe interaction with the customer according to one of the four following processes:\n1. The first of these processes, which is the default, is to utilize an automated electronic\ncommand and response \"script\" contained within PG&E' s Customer Care & Billing\n(\"CC&B\") computer software system. (A representative sample2 of this script, recorded from\ncomputer screenshots in Adobe PDF format, is attached hereto as Exhibit B.) The script\ncontains a series of question prompts and response fields for the CSR to input or transcribe\nthe information given by the customer. The CSR reads the question prompts to the customer\nin sequential order. The response fields do not allow a CSR to input any text, but rather, they\nare fixed, meaning they require a simple click ( or no click) to designate the response.\nHowever, the subsequent prompts will vary depending on the choices selected by the CSR\n(e.g., a \"no\" response to a question may result in no further question prompts on that subject\nor to different questions than those prompted by a \"yes\" response). In addition to selecting\nthe customer's responses to the questions, the CSR is required to confirm the customer's\nlocation and contact information, if already on file, or to manually input the correct\ninformation. The only other response field that permits text input by the CSR is the\n\"Comments\" box located after all the question prompts, The \"Comments\" box is a catch-all\nlocation for all other information the CSR needs to communicate to the workers in the field,\nincluding things such as access issues, additional information about the potential location of\nthe leak, directions if the property is not clearly marked or if mapping of the location is\ninaccurate or misleading, and other relevant information from field order notes prior visits to\nthe customer. Immediately following the \"Comments\" box is a series of commands, or\nadvisory prompts, to be read to the customer by the CSR before concluding the phone call.\nThe advisory prompts that appear vary depending upon the information input to that point by\nthe CSR in the CC&B system. When the script is completed, and the CSR has input all\nrequired information, the CSR must submit the script as completed. Once submitted, an\nelectronic ticket is generated which depicts the information input by the CSR, such as\nwhether the leak is emanating from inside or outside the building, and whether there are any\nrestrictions or impediments to gaining access to the building ( e.g., a locked gate or a dog).\nOnce the ticket has been generated, the CC&B system will indicate if a call is required to\ndispatch to confirm receipt by displaying a red or green message box. If a green message box\n1 Although discouraged from doing so, customers occasionally email potential gas leak information to PG&E's\ncustomer service department. Such emails are handled by a subset of CSRs who are specifically trained to evaluate\nthese emails and determine whether a field ticket is required, without the option of speaking with the customer.\n2 As herein discussed, the actual questions displayed in the CC&B script will vary depending upon the type and\nlocation of gas leak and other information that is input into the system by the CSR.\n\n<<>>\n\n2. 3. 4. is displayed, a call is not required to dispatch to confirm receipt, as it has automatically been\nreceived. However, if a red message box is displayed, a call to dispatch is required to\nconfirm receipt. Today, tickets that are submitted in the gas leak category3 are all\nautomatically prioritized as an immediate response \"priority 1 O\" field order/tag, regardless of\nseverity of the leak as previously determined by the customer's responses to the questions that\nwere outlined in General Reference Guide. Moreover, for most (if not all) cases where a call\ncenter CSR utilizes the automated CC&B script to create a field order/tag, a call will not be\nrequired to notify dispatch of the field order, as the green message box will be displayed\nunder most circumstances.\nIn the event the automated CC&B script feature \"freezes,\" is offiine or otherwise unavailable,\nthe call center CSR must utilize the second of the two processes. That is, the CSR must refer\nto PG&E' s General Reference Guide, which entails the same lines of inquiry for the\ncustomer as contained within the automated CC&B script. After preliminary conversation\nwith the caller and identifying the appropriate guide from among the twenty-eight gas related\nguides in General Reference, the CSR follows the question prompts in the guide, as they\nwould do in CC&B. (A true and correct copy of one of these guides, the \"gas leak\" call\nguide, recorded by copying and pasting the text from the General Reference Guide into an\nAdobe PDF, is attached hereto as Exhibit C.) The CSR must then record the information\nprovided by the customer by manually typing the responses into the comments box while\ncreating a field order/tag by launching the manual process from the \"premise id,\" as opposed\nto clicking fixed response fields in the automated CC&B script. The manual entry of data is\nthe only materially distinguishing characteristic between this process and the first. The\nprocesses are otherwise identical in form and substance.\nThe third process is to utilize the \"On-Line Tech Down\" (OLTD) portal. OLTD is to be used\nonly in the rare situation where the CC&B system-as well as PG&E's other online\napplications-are completely down and/or otherwise inaccessible, which is referred to as a\n\"Code Red\" event. During such a Code Red event, call center CSRs must utilize the \"gas\nleak call guide\" within PGE's General Reference Guide, which again, entails the same line of\ninquiry for the customer as contained within the CC&B automated script. But rather than\ntyping the customer's responses within the CC&B portal as identified in the second process\n(above), the call-center CSR will instead type the responses into the OL TD portal. The CSRs\nare then required to call dispatch to confirm receipt of all gas leak tags created in OLTD,\nsince the OL TD system does not produce any red or green message box indicating whether\ndispatch has received the gas leak tag. Again, this process is otherwise identical in form and\nsubstance to the first two described above. In the rare event PG&E's General Reference\nGuide is down or offiine, CSRs would receive a printed version of the General Reference\nGuide from their respective supervisor.\nFinally, in the event even the OLTD portal is unavailable (which would only happen in the\ncase of a catastrophic failure) CSRs would be required to follow the printed General\nReference Guide and create handwritten ticket requests, which would then be faxed to\n3 There are instances in which a GSR may conclude that a caller identifying a potential gas leak does not require a\nwork ticket to be submitted within PG&E, for instance, when PG&E does not provide gas service in the area\nidentified by the caller. In instances in which the CSR determines a PG&E ticket is not required, the CSR provides\nother information to the caller, such as the identity of their gas service provider if known, instructions to vacate the\npremises, and/or to call 911.\n\n<<>>\n\nPG&E's Dispatch department. The questions and interactions with customers would remain\nthe same under this process as under the other three processes.\nAs mentioned above, ideally, you could provide a definitive answer as to whether the functions\ndescribed above would constitute covered safety-sensitive functions as defined by CFR 49 CFR\n§ 192.615. If that's not possible, the parties would appreciate any insight the Office of Pipeline\nSafety might have as to that issue.\nThank you,\nAlexander Pacheco\nGeneral Counsel\nIBEW Local 1245\nCC: Tom Dalzell, IBEW 1245 Business Manager\nBryan Carroll, IBEW 1245 Assistant Business Manager\nMissy Parry, PG&E Senior Counsel\nRobin Wix, PG&E Labor Relations Principal Negotiator\n\n<<>>\n\nExhibit A\n\n<<>>\n\nFebruary 13, 1990\nMr. Bill Quilhot\nPresident\nLocal Union 1582\nInternational Brotherhood of\nElectrical Workers\nAurora, Illinois 60426\nDear Mr. Quilhot:\nYour letters of December 26, 1989, and January 30, 1990, ask for additional clarification of whether an\nemployee known as a \"service clerk\" who takes calls pertaining to gas pipeline leaks would be subject\nto drug testing under DOT's rules in 49 CFR Part 199.\nI can affirm the understanding that Mike Youngs of Northern Illinois Gas expressed about such\nemployees in his letter to Bea Vandervalk dated October 25, 1989. Any pipeline company employee\nwho is responsible for receiving telephone notices of gas leaks, identifying those notices that require\nimmediate response by the company, and dispatching personnel to the scene would be subject to drug\ntesting. The employee would be covered by the rules because he or she would be performing on a\npipeline emergency-response functions that are regulated under 49 CFR Part 192, specifically\n§ 192.615 concerning emergency plans. In general, as provided by the Part 199 definition of\n\"employee,\" any person who performs on a gas pipeline a regulated operating, maintenance, or\nemergency-response function is subject to drug testing.\nI trust this satisfactorily responds to your ip.quiry.\nSincerely,\nGeorge W. Tenley, Jr.\nDirector\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\ndal/199.1\n90-02-13\n\n<<>>\n\nExhibit B\n\n<<>>\n\nPG&E Gas Leak Script for CCO\n5diedule FA/fOforl'l'emlR 1413600123 • IUHABISJ ,Oilll.lY\nPlellselndlmt'elfletypeoffieldActNIUesyouneedtoaeate. -----•·\n, r....;.;......:::ii....1 ..,__. Mr ....,; COIII ==\"\"---\"\nSI' 1413ICION5 Gas-Htr-11es-Sm/Hed-Standanlfftaftthly • l Serilll/Met.erllead Roule LJC6z,ll23MADI ST, OAllllY, CA,, 945611600101, 1.ISA, lleskl«ltlal Detached 1lauH,\n14136001\nWhat typeal~wllyau\"be;:. selectli =:.:: \"? :...;; ' ::;; 8i ~il;=:,_:::::::::;\"';==\nlallctS-..ef&lill .... Cllll ____ ... I -==~-;:::::::....::::::::::::;;::::::::::;=::.....=:====::;--;:::'.---~,------.\n........ -~ ... ....\n.. _.. ............ ...i11111 .___ .... !::;-;:==--\n..,\ns.aeca....,.llll&o.rs-m ---\n..................................... lfllat .................................... ........,\n~•JGm~\n-\n.... -----~--' ...._\nof\n________ _, [ 7\nlaisedonansweist-oilie l'elled s a>GaswkilnvestlOatlonffoltalsbeenselected.RevleWFAdetalls. ___ ..,\n-\n..__ ______ .....,;. _ __,\n~ ....\nC--=t\"-.....-:(\nNlltO..IINlt&: 11.M~\nNlltO-stl'eetl.l da\n\n<<>>\n\n\"\"'.....,,.,.,,..._Slla?\nDldthec:allei',-tionGasT~I.IMs?\nAddaddltlanal~aildUpdatePhonellumber(lf-ry)b'fD 147/NIIIIIIII.\nOIIH«lMlt.....,_lii....,..IH~ (ilit,.._.Stti,u.lNWM lliilioilll&\n......... clcliMlhtSavefO tl! .... filrtlillfO~llll ........ ltlHIM'c:lclc•dilltllnUllla ..... w•ro ..... , ........\n............\nColll.-ts\nNo -'ttess or safety lssues;Ado'ess,I.Jnlt/Spac #/Gare Code&:-left side ofhoute;EVAC; Xs1r1•2nd st;Xstr2•3rd ave; Contad:Name-lym;CentactPhone-('109) 123-4567;\n__ chararul'llremmill\n\"'' Pbene«umlMlr ('109) 123-4567 ----~-·-\nExtefulan I I \"'-e fomlllt {999) 999-9999\nAIIYlsethe~IIKlru:xt,_..blefteldlrenlk,erepreent.e.lM!dbedbllatdiedlmlnedla~a.nd•rrivesl>t!rdvlll _.th.....,tion afe.\n.. ,.,..,......., ...... _,... ........ ..., ......... ......., ...... ___.. ........... ..,,._ _ _,_. ...........\n.. ...,._,... ..... .............................. ..\n> NDt required ~allerts reporting an .-rea .,,_,.fm!mlseleak\n•o.1111t ...... lM,.._NiM .. ......._1Mal\n.......... _.,._....__... ........ ,.._. ...... ___.,\n._,..._. ............. c.11.uhe....,.......,\n...... ,..,., ...... '---\"'\"'-----'\n\n<<>>\n\n123 folAIN ST, O AKLEY, CA, 945611600107, tJSA, Residential Detached H ouse,\nfleldONler 1473600123/Di;patched ( 1 actMty) I Scheduled 02-28-2017\nPremlseID c( ~===--''\n~ =- WMAINST,OAl>>\n\nExhibit C\n\n<<>>\n\nProcess when CC&B Scripting is Down and a customer reports a gas leak,\ngas odor or anxiety about gas situation\n. USE CC&B SCRIPTING FOR ALL GAS LEAK\nOR GAS ODOR CALLS\no The process below should ONLY be used if CC&B\nscripting is down\n• Identify location of leak/ odor\no Confirm address / location - Ask the following\n• I n the last 24 hours, have you had your sewer cleaned?\n• Is the odor is INSIDE or OUTSIDE\n■ Can you provide any additional access information or any\ndetails that helps describe the physical location of the gas\nleak at the premise?\n• Are there any ACCESS ISSUES to the premise (locked\ngates/dogs)\n• Does the customer want to arrange for key drop off?\n• Contact Name\n■ Contact Phone Number\n■ Ask for the nearest CROSS STREET\n■ Can you hear gas hissing or blowing?\n■ Are Police / Fire / Media on site?\no Issue Immediate Response Field Order\n■ Use appropriate Field Activity Type: GASLEAKD,\nGASLEAKF, GASLEAKH, GASLEAKI, GASLEAKM,\nGASLEAKO, GASLEAKP, GASLEAKR, GASLEAKW,\nGLKXBORE, GLKCOMPI, GLKCOMPO\n■ Ensure priority code 10 is indicated\n■ In comments, note\n■ If CIA account\n■ Indicate CIA first in comments\n■ Severity (Blowing or Hissing)\n■ If account has Proximity Ltr Alert\n■ Indicate PROXIMITY ALERT\n■ Caller mentions Gas Transmission Lines\n■ Indicate Gas Transmission Line\n■ Location (inside or outside)\n• Access and Dogs\n■ Cross Streets\n■ Name of caller\n\n<<>>\n\n•\n■ Checking Pending Field Orders for Pilot Relight\nRequest\n■ Pilot Relight Order EXISTS\n■ Cancel Field Activity\n■ Use cancel reason code: CANCEL-OTHER\nFAS\n• Indicate appropriate code in gas leak field\norder comments\no a€