# MARKWEST RANGER PIPELINE COMPANY, L.L.C. — Notice of Probable Violation

**Citation:** CPF 220045018  
**Type / status:** enforcement / historical  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2004-12-07

CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.503(b), 195.505(b), 195.505(c).

## Document text

Notice of Probable Violation involving MARKWEST RANGER PIPELINE COMPANY, L.L.C.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195,  195.503(b),  195.505(b),  195.505(c). The case was opened on 2004-12-07 and is reported as closed as of 2008-06-16. Proposed civil penalty: $5,000. Assessed civil penalty: $5,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

220045018_Final Order_03292005.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220045018/220045018_Final%20Order_03292005.pdf

cpf_220045018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220045018/cpf_220045018.pdf

220045018_Final Order_03292005.pdf

@
U.S. Deponment
of Tronsportqtion
Plpellne qnd
Hqzordous l qfedols Sqtety
Actmlnfuilrotion
400 Sevenlh Streel, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
lr4AFi 2 g li,'l:,
Mr. David Young
Senior Vice President, NEBU
MarkWest Hydrocarbon, Inc.
155 Inverness Drive West, #200
Englewood, CO 801 12-5000
RE: CPFNo. 2-2004-5018
Dear Mr. Young:
Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Adminisffator for Pipeline Safety in the
above-referenced case. It makes findings of violation, requires certain corrective actions, and
assesses a civil penalty of $5,000. Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that
document under 49 C.F.R.$ 190.5. At such time that the civil penalty is paid and the terms of the
compliance order are completed, as determined by the Director, Southem Region, this enforcement
action will be closed. Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that document under
49 C.F.R. S 190.5.
Sincerely,
-y'''.- l'I---
James Reynolds
Pipeline ComPliance Registry
Office of PiPeline SafetY
Ms. Linda Daugherty, Region Director
Southern Region, OPS



DEPARTMENT OF' TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
In the Matter of
MarkWest Hydrocarbon, Inc.,
Respondent
)
)
)
CPF No. 2-2004-5018
F'INAL ORDER
On August 31 through September 2,2004 pursuant to 49 U.S.C. $ 60117, representatives of the
Southem Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an inspection of Respondent's
Operator Qualification Plan at Respondent's Kenova, West Virginia facility. As a result of this
investigation, the Director, Southem Region, OPS, issued to Respondent, by letter dated December
7,2004, aNotice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order
(Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. $ 190.207 ,the Notice proposed finding that Respondent had
committed violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195, proposed assessing a civil penalty of $5,000 for one of
the alleged violations, and proposed that Respondent take certain measures to correct the alleged
violations.t
Respondent responded to the Notice by letter dated, January 20,2005 (Response). Respondent
contested one of the five allegations, offered information in explanation of the allegation, and
requested additional clarification and mitigation or elimination of the proposed civil penalty.
Respondent did not request a hearing, and therefore has waived its right to one.
FINDINGS OFVIOLATION
ln 1ts Response, Respondent did not contest Items 1, 2,4, and 5 of the Notice. Accordingly, I find
that Respondent violated the following sections of 49 C.F.R, Part 195, as more fully described in the
Notice:
IThi.
however. is no longer before RSPA for decision. Effective February 20,2005, the Pipeline and
"ur",
Hazardous Materials Safety Administraiion (PHMSA) was created to further the highest degree of safety rn pipeline
fianspo ation and hazardous materials fansportation. See, section 108 of the Norman Y. Mineta Research and
Special programs Improvement Act (Public iarv 108-426,1 18 Stat. 2423-2429 (November 30, 2004)). See a1so, 70
feA. Reg. SZOS 6ebruary 18, 2005) redelegating the pipeline safely functions to the Administrator, PHMSA.



49 C.F.R. $ 195.503(b) -- failing to develop a generic abnormal operating conditions
list and failing to qualify each employee that performs covered tasks, to recogtrize
and react to each item on the list.
49 C.F.R. $ 195.505(a) and (b)-- failing to determine all covered tasks that are to be
included in the Operator Qualification Plan and failing to develop evaluation
methods for each covered task.
49 C.F.R. $ 195.505(c)--failing to adequately prepare and follow a written
qualification pro$am, as Respondent failed to include provisions to define the
number ofpersons, and under what conditions, a qualified person can direct and
observe non-qualified persons. Also, Respondent failed to define covered tasks, such
as welding, that can not be directed and observed.
49 C.F.R. $ 195.509(b)-failing to complete the qualification of individuals
performing covered tasks by October 28,2002, as a long term employee was not
qualified until November 4,2002.
These findings ofviolation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enfotcement action
taken against Respondent.
(Contested Items)
Item 3 of the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. $ 195.505(b) by failing to have and
follow a written qualification program with provisions to ensure through evaluation that individuals
performing covered tasks are qualified. Respondent permitted employee "A" to evaluate and qualifli
employee "B" who in tum evaluated and qualified employee "A."
In response to the Notice, Respondent argued that it met the requirements of 49 C.F.R. $ 195.505,
as the employee evaluations were completed. Respondent explained that its individual qualification
of covered tasks was conducted through observations of job performance. There was interaction
betlveen the evaluator and the person being evaluated, although, interaction was not documented.
Respondent further explained that the individuals who evaluated each other have a combined 50
years experience in the oil and gas industry. Respondent stated that it did not have a written protocol
for testing, although, abnormal operating conditions are incoryorated in covered tasks work
instructions.
Respondent is responsible for compliance with the pipeline safetyregulations, which includes sound
- - - f f - - - - - : . - - - - , - - , - t : - - - - ^ T r l - ^ - . - - - l - . i - - - . - - - , : - ^ - ^ - . , . i r i ^ - ^ , , ^ l i C ^ ^ + i ^ -
reuulu Ktrcplttg tu uuctllllcltt cutltp iltlut. I llri ruBulauull IvqutrE5 <r !Yr.lttsr.t t{uill l l lu<llrvu Pru6r4rrr'
including written procedures for evaluating an employee's qualifications. Respondent failed to
produce any records or documentation demonstrating that either employee's evaluation was
supported by a written protocol for testing or a written guideline for abnormal operating conditions



3
responses for that covered task. There were no documented questions to ask or documented replies
to questions. Respondent acknowledged that there was no evidence of interaction during the
evaluation. An evaluation of an individual's qualifications conducted only by observation ofjob
performance is insufficient to comply with pipeline safety regulations. Documentation is essential
not only to show that the evaluation was conducted in accordance with a written qualification
program, but to show that the individuals performing covered tasks are qualified. Accordingly, I find
Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. S 195.505(b), by not having and following a written qualification
program with provisions to ensure through evaluation that individuals performing covered tasks are
qualified.
This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action
taken against Respondent.
ASSESSMENT OFPENALTY
TheNoticeproposeda$5,000civilpenaltyforviolationof4gC.F.R.$$195.505(b). Under
49U.S.C. S60l22,Respondentissubjecttoacivilpenaltynottoexceed$100,000perviolationfor
each day of the violation up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any related series of violations.
49 U.S.C. 5 60122 and 49 C.F.R. $ 190.225 require that, in determining the amount of the civil
penalty, I consider the following criteria: natwe, circumstances, and gravity of the violation, degree
of Respondent's culpability, history of Respondent's prior offenses, Respondent's ability to pay the
penalty, good faith by Respondent in attempting to achieve compliance, the effect on Respondent's
ability to continue in business, and such other matters as justice may require.
The Notice proposed a penalty for Item 3, as Respondent failed to have and follow a written
qualification program with provisions to ensure through evaluation that individuals performing
covered tasks are qualified. Respondent argued that the proposed civil penalty should be eliminated
or mitigated because the individuals who evaluated each other have a combined 50 years experience
in the oil and gas industry. Contrary to Respondent's position, 49 C.F.R. $195.505(b) does not
include the grand-fathering of employees to satisfy the individual's qualification to perform covered
tasks. In furtherance, Respondent acknowledged that there was no evidence of interaction during
the evaluation. To show that an individual performing a covered task is qualified, an evaluation
must be conducted in accordance with a written qualification program and supported by a written
protocol for testing. Without this history an operator increases the risk of harm to its personnel and
the public. Respondent has not shown any circumstance that would have prevented or justified it
not having and following a written qualification program with provisions to ensure through
evaluation that individuals performing covered tasks are qualified. Accordingly, having reviewed
the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of$5,000.
Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Payment may be made by
sending acertihed check ormoneyorder (containingthe CPF Number forthis case) payable to'U.S.
Department ofTransportation" to the Federal Aviation Adminishation, Mike MonroneyAeronautical
Center, Financial Operations Division (AMZ-120),P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City' OK 73125.



4
Failure to pay the $5,000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate in
accordancewith3l U.S.C. 53717,31C.F.R. $ 901.9and49C.F.R. $ 89.23. Pursuanttothosesame
authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6Y) per annum will be charged if palment is not
made within I 10 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty may result in referral
of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a United States District Court.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item lr 2) 3,4, and 5 for violations of
49 C.F.R. Part 195.
Under 49 U.S.C. $ 601 18(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or
who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to ccmply v,,i'Jr the applicable safety staiidards
established under chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. g 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R.
$ 190.217, Respondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the
pipeline safety regulations applicable to its operations. Respondent must -
1. Develop, within 30 days of receipt of this Order, a generic abnormal
operating condition list and qualify each employee that performs covered
tasks, to recognize and react to each item on the list in compliance with
49 C.F.R. 6195.
2.
Review all Part 195 requirements and operator O&M requirements to
determine all covered tasks that should be part of the Operator Qualification
Plan, within 30 days of receipt of this Order.
Develop evaluation methods for each of the covered tasks identified in item
#2 above. The method(s) developed must test knowledge, skills, and abilities
that are needed to perform each task on the covered task list. In addition, on
the job performance tests must have documented interaction between the
evaluator and the person being evaluated; observation of the work is
insufficient compliance. Complete this item within 90 days ofreceipt of this
order.
4.
Define the number of non-qualified persons(span of control) that a qualified
individual can direct and observe at one time by covered task. In addition,
define which covered task(s) can not be directed and observed, such as
welding. Complete this item within 30 days of receipt of this order.
a r " ^ l ; { i ' ^ l l - * * l ^ " ^ ^ ^ ; - - ^ ^ ^ - l ^ - ^ ^ , , , i r L t L ^ ^ - , . , A ' ^ ^ - - r ^ - ^ . . ^ l : f i ^ ^ , : ^ -
urr wrrryl\JJwlJ rrr 6rvw\rr uarr\,w wrf,rr Lrll/ rrLw LrPlratur vuorrrt(,attt\rt-
Plan no later than 90 days from receipt ofthe Final Order.



6.
Submit documentation and evidence of completion of these actions within
90 days of receipt of the Final Order to the Director, OPS, Southern Region.
7.
The Director, OPS, Southern Region may graat an extension of time for
compliance with any of the terms of this order for good cause. A request for
an extension must be in writins.
Faiiure to comply with this Final Order may result in the assessment of civil penalties of up to
$100,000 per violation per day, or in the refetral ofthe case forjudicial enforcement.
Under49C.F.R. $ l90.215,RespondenthasarighttosubmitaPetitionforReconsiderationofthis
Final Order. The petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent's receipt of this Final
Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The filing of the petition automatically
stays the paynent of any civil penalty assessed. All other terms of the order, including any required
corrective action, remain in full effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a
stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt.
HAfi 29 fir'
Date Issued
Gerard
for Pioeline Safetv

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/220045018>
- Source ID: `phmsa-enforcement`
- SHA-256: `db1692b56591ba125141befba1111a5283c67ee41f6905d6e2791da1a5d46bc9`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T04:44:44.458Z
- Exported: 2026-08-25T11:57:06.140Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-enforcement-220045018`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "cpf": "220045018",
  "operator": "MARKWEST RANGER PIPELINE COMPANY, L.L.C.",
  "region": "Southern",
  "pipelineType": "INTERSTATE LIQUID ONSHORE",
  "caseStatus": "CLOSED",
  "citedSections": [
    "195.503(b)",
    "195.505(b)",
    "195.505(c)"
  ],
  "dataAsOf": "08/04/2026 12PM",
  "caseDataAsOf": "2026-08-04",
  "attachmentCount": 2,
  "attachments": [
    {
      "name": "220045018_Final Order_03292005.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220045018/220045018_Final%20Order_03292005.pdf",
      "bytes": 296512,
      "category": "agency_document"
    },
    {
      "name": "cpf_220045018.pdf",
      "url": "https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220045018/cpf_220045018.pdf",
      "bytes": 843149,
      "category": "case_document"
    }
  ],
  "extractedAgencyDocumentCount": 1,
  "attachmentPolicy": "Official attachment links are retained. Agency-issued documents may also include a verified local PDF and page-level text representation.",
  "jurisdiction": "US",
  "operatorName": "MARKWEST RANGER PIPELINE COMPANY, L.L.C."
}
```