{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120105009","title":"BUCKEYE PARTNERS, LP — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2010-09-27","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120105009.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120105009.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120105009","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120105009","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving BUCKEYE PARTNERS, LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 195.402(a). The case was opened on 2010-09-27 and is reported as closed as of 2011-02-22. Proposed civil penalty: $100,000. Assessed civil penalty: $100,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120105009_FinalOrder_01312011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120105009/120105009_FinalOrder_01312011.pdf\n\n120105009_FinalOrder_01312011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120105009/120105009_FinalOrder_01312011_text.pdf\n\n120105009_NOPV PCP_09272010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120105009/120105009_NOPV%20PCP_09272010.pdf\n\n120105009_NOPV PCP_09272010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120105009/120105009_NOPV%20PCP_09272010_text.pdf\n\n120105009_Operator Response to NOPV_10252010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120105009/120105009_Operator%20Response%20to%20NOPV_10252010.pdf\n\n120105009_FinalOrder_01312011_text.pdf\n\nJAN 31 2011\nMr. Jerry J. Ashcroft III\nVice President – Field Operations\nBuckeye Partners, L.P.\nFive TEK Park\n9999 Hamilton Boulevard\nBreinigsville, PA 18031\nRe: CPF No. 1-2010-5009\nDear Mr. Ashcroft:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $100,000. The penalty payment terms are set forth in the\nFinal Order. This enforcement action closes automatically upon receipt of payment. Service of\nthe Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise\nprovided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Byron E. Coy, Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7005 1160 0001 0041 3467]\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)\nBuckeye Partners, L.P., ) CPF No. 1-2010-5009\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn November 17, 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the New York State\nDepartment of Public Service (NYDPS), as agent for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an investigation of\nan accident in Queens, NY involving the pipeline system operated by Buckeye Partners, L.P.\n(Buckeye or Respondent). Buckeye and its consolidated subsidiaries operate approximately\n5,400 miles of pipeline and 67 active products terminals that provide aggregate storage capacity\nof approximately 27.2 million barrels.1\nThe investigation arose out of Buckeye’s failure to properly locate a 12-inch diameter pipeline,\nresulting in damage to the pipeline and the release of approximately 110 gallons of jet fuel. The\nrelease caused an interruption of fuel supply to LaGuardia airport.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated September 27, 2010, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty.\nIn accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Buckeye had violated\n49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $100,000 for the alleged\nviolation.\nBuckeye responded to the Notice by letter dated October 25, 2010 (Response). The company did\nnot contest the allegations of violation but provided an explanation of its actions and requested\nthat the proposed civil penalty be reduced. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore\nhas waived its right to one.\n1 SEC Form 10-K, Buckeye Partners, L.P., February 26, 2010, at 6.\n\n\n\n2\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Buckeye did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.\nPart 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a), which states:\n§ 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and\nemergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline\nsystem a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations\nand maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and\nemergencies . . . .\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its\nmanual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities.\nSpecifically, the Notice alleged that Buckeye failed to locate a pipeline in accordance with its\nOperating and Maintenance (O&M) procedures, Maintenance Manual, A-03—Line Location,\nSection 2. This procedure states to “[u]se a line locator to locate the line …use the conductive\nmethod to locate the line. If it is not possible to use this method, then proceed by using the\ninductive method. Mark the location with paint.”2\nHowever, on November 12, 2009, a Buckeye employee failed to use a line locator device, and\nfailed to use either a conductive or inductive method to locate Buckeye’s pipeline along Skillman\nAvenue. Instead, the Buckeye employee relied only on maps to locate the line. As a result,\nBuckeye provided misinformation to a New York City Mass Transit Authority (MTA)\ncontractor, marking the location of the pipeline approximately 61 inches from its actual\nlocation.\n3 On November 17, 2009, the MTA contractor hit Buckeye’s Line 601 and\napproximately 110 gallons of jet fuel were released. This release caused an interruption of fuel\nsupply to La Guardia Airport. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation.\nAccordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49\nC.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its O&M procedures for locating a pipeline.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; the Respondent’s\nability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing\nbusiness; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\n2 Pipeline Safety Violation Report, Exhibit A, at 1, paragraph 2.2.\n3 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report, at 1.\n\n\n\n3\nregulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without\nany reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $100,000 for the violations cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $100,000 for Respondent’s violation of 49\nC.F.R. § 195.402(a), for failing to follow its O&M procedures for locating a pipeline. In its\nResponse, Buckeye argued that the penalty should be substantially reduced due to the history and\ncircumstances of the accident, namely the third party contractor’s role in the accidental pipeline\nrelease. Respondent conceded that its employee who initially located the pipeline on November\n12th did not follow Buckeye’s locating procedure and misinformed the contractor hired by the\nMTA, but Respondent contended that it had no knowledge of the additional drilling work\nconducted by the contractor or the intent to re-drill the bore hole under a modified scope of work\nplan. Buckeye argued that if it knew of the additional drilling activities, it would have re-\nanalyzed its method for locating the pipeline and would have re-verified the pipeline location.\nOn this basis, Buckeye requests a penalty reduction.\nAlthough the MTA contractor did not notify Buckeye of the subsequent drilling on November\n17th\n, the contractor was nevertheless drilling based solely on the erroneous information provided\nby Buckeye on November 12th\n. It was determined after the failure that Respondent’s marking of\nthe pipeline was approximately 61 inches or 5 feet from the actual location of the pipeline.4\nConsequently, the contractor punctured the pipeline, releasing 110 gallons of jet fuel and\ninterrupting the fuel supply to LaGuardia Airport.\nThe circumstances, gravity, and culpability weighed heavily in determining the civil penalty.\nFirst, Respondent’s employee failed to follow the company’s own procedures regarding locating\na pipeline and subsequently provided misinformation to a MTA contractor. The contractor’s\ndrilling based on Buckeye’s information led to damage to the pipeline and a release of 110\ngallons of jet fuel. Respondent’s non-compliance occurred in a high-consequence area (HCA)\ncompliance impacted public safety. Not only did Respondent’s non-compliance result in an\ninterruption of jet fuel to LaGuardia Airport, but 100 gallons of jet fuel was released in a HCA\nwhere it could have ignited.\nand also contributed to the cause of a reportable accident.5 Further, Respondent’s non-\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $100,000 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a).\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Federal regulations\n(49 C.F.R. § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer through the Federal\nReserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S. Treasury. Detailed\ninstructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire transfers should be\ndirected to: Financial Operations Division (AMZ-341), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike\nMonroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 269039, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125. The\nFinancial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8893.\n4 Id.\n5 Violation Report, at 4.\n\n\n\n4\nFailure to pay the $100,000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual\nrate in accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3717, 31 C.F.R. § 901.9 and 49 C.F.R. § 89.23. Pursuant to\nthose same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if\npayment is not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty\nmay result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a district\ncourt of the United States.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has the right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of\nthis Final Order. The petition must be sent to: Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline\nSafety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC\n20590, with a copy sent to the Office of Chief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. PHMSA\nwill accept petitions received no later than 20 days after receipt of service of the Final Order by\nthe Respondent, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other\nrequirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.215. The filing of a petition automatically stays the payment of\nany civil penalty assessed but does not stay any other provisions of the Final Order, including\nany required corrective actions. If Respondent submits payment of the civil penalty, the Final\nOrder becomes the final administrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is\nwaived.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":11925}