{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120115013","title":"BUCKEYE PARTNERS, LP — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2011-12-29","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.452(h)(4)(i)(d), 195.575.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120115013.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120115013.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120115013","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120115013","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving BUCKEYE PARTNERS, LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.452(h)(4)(i)(d),  195.575. The case was opened on 2011-12-29 and is reported as closed as of 2014-06-06. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120115013_Closure Letter_06062014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_Closure%20Letter_06062014.pdf\n\n120115013_Closure Letter_06062014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_Closure%20Letter_06062014_text.pdf\n\n120115013_Final Order_07272012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_Final%20Order_07272012.pdf\n\n120115013_Final Order_07272012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_Final%20Order_07272012_text.pdf\n\n120115013_NOPV-PCO_12292011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_NOPV-PCO_12292011.pdf\n\n120115013_NOPV-PCO_12292011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_NOPV-PCO_12292011_text.pdf\n\n120115013_Operator Response_01272012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120115013/120115013_Operator%20Response_01272012.pdf\n\n120115013_Closure Letter_06062014_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department Of Transportation Pipeline and 609.989.2171\nHazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n820 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 103\nWest Trenton, NJ 08628\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS MAIL\nJune 06, 2014\nThomas Scott Collier\nVice President, Performance Assurance & Asset Integrity\nBuckeye Partners, L.P.\nFive TEK Park\n9999 Hamilton Boulevard\nBreinigsville, PA 18031\nCPF 1-2011-5013\nDear Mr. Collier:\nOn July 27, 2012, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety,\nissued to Buckeye Partners, L.P. (Buckeye) a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This Order\nincluded a Compliance Order.\nPlease be advised, we reviewed your quarterly reports that you submitted in accordance with the\nrequirements set forth in this Compliance Order. We also reviewed your letter dated April 11, 2014\nwherein you stated that Buckeye’s Line 742 crossing the Delaware River was abandoned on January 16,\n2014 (inadvertently dated January 16, 2004). Pursuant to Item 5 of this Compliance Order, after Buckeye\nhas abandoned said portion of the pipeline, Buckeye will not be required to comply with the other terms\nof this Compliance Order.\nAccordingly, this case is now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to the matters\ninvolved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nByron E. Coy, PE\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n\n120115013_Final Order_07272012_text.pdf\n\nJULY 27, 2012\nMr. Clark Smith\nPresident & Chief Executive Officer\nBuckeye Partners, L.P.\nOne Greenway Plaza\nSuite 600\nHouston, TX 77046\nRe: CPF No. 1-2011-5013\nDear Mr. Smith:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Buckeye Partners, L.P. to comply with\nthe pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been completed, as\ndetermined by the Director, Eastern Region, this enforcement action will be closed. 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. Thomas S. (Scott) Collier, Vice President, Performance Assurance & Asset Integrity\nBuckeye Partners, LP – 5 Tek Park, 9999 Hamilton Blvd., Breinigsville, PA 18031\nMr. Byron Coy, Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA\nMr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN 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______________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nBuckeye Partners, L.P., ) CPF No. 1-2011-5013\n)\nRespondent. )\n______________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn July 23, 2009, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS) received a notification through the Integrity Management Database\n(Notification #365) from Buckeye Partners, L.P. (BPL or Respondent) regarding a dent located\non the top portion of its PY742PL pipeline that met the regulatory criteria for immediate repair.\nOn September 9, 2010, BPL applied for a Special Permit to waive compliance with the\nregulatory requirement for immediate repair.1 On September 14, 2011, PHMSA denied BPL’s\nrequest for a Special Permit. BPL did not make immediate repairs. BPL’s PY742PL pipeline\nruns from Paulsboro, New Jersey and crosses the Delaware River to the Philadelphia,\nPennsylvania Airport, a High Consequence Areas (HCAs). 2 BPL owns and operates\napproximately 6,000 miles of pipelines transporting refined petroleum products and highly\nvolatile liquids.3 Approximately 3,558 of those pipeline miles are in or could affect HCAs and\nare covered by BPL’s integrity management program.\nAs a result of BPL’s failure to make immediate repairs, the Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA,\n(Director), issued to Respondent, by letter dated December 29, 2011, a Notice of Probable\nViolation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207,\nthe Notice proposed finding that Respondent had committed violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and\nproposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations.\n1 See Special Permit Docket # PHMSA 2010-0261.\n2 An HCA is defined as: (1) a commercially navigable waterway, which means a waterway where a substantial\nlikelihood of commercial navigation exists; (2) a high population area, which means an urbanized area, as defined\nand delineated by the Census Bureau, that contains 50,000 or more people and has a population density of at least\n1,000 people per square mile; (3) an other populated area, which means a place, as defined and delineated by the\nCensus Bureau, that contains a concentrated population, such as an incorporated or unincorporated city, town,\nvillage, or other designated residential or commercial area; and (4) an unusually sensitive area, as defined in\n§ 195.6. 49 C.F.R. § 195.450.\n3 http://www.buckeye.com/BusinessOperations/tabid/56/Default.aspx and\nhttp://www.buckeye.com/AboutUs/tabid/54/Default.aspx (last accessed on June 22, 2012).\n\n\n\n2\nBPL responded to the Notice by letter dated January 27, 2012 (Response). The company did not\ncontest the allegations of violation but provided information concerning the corrective actions it\nwill take. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(D), which\nstates:\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(h) What actions must an operator take to address integrity issues?\n(1) ….\n(4) Special requirements for scheduling remediation —(i) Immediate\nrepair conditions. An operator’s evaluation and remediation schedule\nmust provide for immediate repair conditions. To maintain safety, an\noperator must temporarily reduce operating pressure or shut down the\npipeline until the operator completes the repair of these conditions. An\noperator must calculate the temporary reduction in operating pressure\nusing the formula in Section 451.6.2.2 (b) of ANSI/ASME B31.4\n(incorporated by reference, see § 195.3). An operator must treat the\nfollowing conditions as immediate repair conditions:\n(A) …\n(D) A dent located on the top of the pipeline (above the 4 and 8\no’clock positions) with a depth greater than 6% of the nominal pipe\ndiameter.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(D) by failing to remediate an\nimmediate repair condition, and by failing to temporarily reduce operating pressure or shut down\nthe pipeline until the repair had been completed. Specifically, the Notice alleged that BPL failed\nto reduce the pressure or shut down its PY742PL pipeline until it repaired an 8.2% deep dent\nlocated on the top of the pipeline. On July 23, 2009, BPL notified PHMSA that an ILI report\nindicated that a dent, an immediate repair condition, had been found on its PY742PL pipeline,\nabout 75 feet off the north bank of the Delaware River.\n4 Per § 195.452, BPL was required to\nschedule an immediate repair. Instead, on September 9, 2010, over a year later, BPL requested a\nspecial permit to waive this requirement. On September 14, 2011, PHMSA denied BPL’s\nrequest for a Special Permit to waive the regulatory requirement for immediate repair.5\n4 Section 195.452(h)(4)(i)(B) defines an “immediate repair condition” as a condition where a “calculation of the\nremaining strength of the pipe shows a predicted burst pressure less than the established maximum operating\npressure at the location of the anomaly.” Section 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(D) defines a “180-day condition” as a condition\nwhere a “calculation of the remaining strength of the pipe shows an operating pressure that is less than the current\nestablished maximum operating pressure at the location of the anomaly.”\n5 Buckeye Request for Special Permit dated September 9, 2010, Violation Report at Exhibit A-4.\n\n\n\n3\nTherefore, BPL was required to bring the PY742PL pipeline into compliance. Respondent did\nnot take immediate action to reduce operating pressure or shut down its PY742PL pipeline and\nstated that it would replace the line by the end of 2012.\n6\nIn its Response, Respondent did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it failed to reduce\nthe pressure or shut down the PY742PL pipeline until repair of the dent but expressed its intent\nto comply with the proposed compliance order. 7 BPL stated that it plans to install a replacement\ncontrol valve and related equipment to better protect the pipeline from pressure surges.\nPipeline operators are obligated to take immediate action including temporarily reducing\noperating pressure or shutting down a line until repairs can be made when anomalies meeting the\ncriteria for immediate repair conditions are identified in the course of an integrity assessment.\nRespondent failed to reduce the pressure or shut down the pipeline until an immediate repair\ncondition was repaired as required by § 195.452(h)(4(i)(D). The failure to do so can have direct\nsafety impacts. Accordingly, having reviewed the record, I find that Respondent violated\n49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(D).\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.575(a)-(e), which states:\n§ 195.575 Which facilities must I electrically isolate and what\ninspections, tests, and safeguards are required?\n(a) You must electrically isolate each buried or submerged pipeline\nfrom other metallic structures, unless you electrically interconnect and\ncathodically protect the pipeline and the other structures as a single unit.\n(b) You must install one or more insulating devices where electrical\nisolation of a portion of a pipeline is necessary to facilitate the application\nof corrosion control.\n(c) You must inspect and electrically test each electrical isolation to\nassure the isolation is adequate.\n(d) If you install an insulating device in an area where a combustible\natmosphere is reasonable to foresee, you must take precautions to prevent\narcing.\n(e) If a pipeline is in close proximity to electrical transmission tower\nfootings, ground cables, or counterpoise, or in other areas where it is\nreasonable to foresee fault currents or an unusual risk of lightning, you\nmust protect the pipeline against damage from fault currents or lightning\nand take protective measures at insulating devices.\n6 Buckeye’s Special Permit application (PHMSA 2010-0261), dated September 9, 2010, included an engineering\nanalysis final report on the dent. Pipeline Safety Violation Report CPF 1-2011-5013 (Violation Report) at Exhibit\nA-1.\n7 Response at 1.\n\n\n\n4\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated § 195.575 (a)-(e) by failing to electrically isolate,\ninspect, and test the pipeline and failing to take protective measures at insulating devices against\ndamage from fault currents or lightning. Specially, the Notice alleged that cathodic protection\ntests on Respondent’s PY742PL pipeline and casing indicated a metallic short since\nFebruary 18, 2011.8\nIn its Response, Respondent did not contest the allegation in the Notice but expressed its intent\nto comply with the proposed compliance order.\nappropriate permits, it will install a new river crossing by the directional drill method and\nabandon the dented pipe section under the river. Accordingly, after considering all the evidence,\nI find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.575(a)-(e) by failing to electrically isolate,\ninspect, and test the pipeline and failing to take protective measures at insulating devices against\ndamage from fault currents or lightning.\n9 BPL stated that, after acquiring all of the\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. §§ 195.452(h)(4)(i)(D), and 195.575(a)-(e), respectively.\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids\nor who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety\nstandards established under chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and\n49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Respondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance\nwith the pipeline safety regulations applicable to its operations:\n1. With respect to the violation of § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(D), (Item 1), Respondent must verify\nthat the replacement control valve is installed correctly on the PY742PL pipeline and that\nthe set point is adjusted to protect the integrity of the pipeline from pressure surges.\nRespondent must demonstrate to the Director that the replacement control valve is\ncorrectly installed on the PY742PL pipeline within 30 days of receipt of this Final Order.\n2. With respect to the violation of § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(D), (Item 1), Respondent must\ncomplete the repair of the subject dent on PY742PL pipeline within 18 months of receipt\nof this Final Order. The repair must be performed in accordance with § 195.422 and\nBPL’s Operation and Maintenance Manual, as appropriate. Respondent must\ndemonstrate to the Director that this repair is complete.\n3. With respect to the violation of § 195.575 (Item 2), Respondent must bring its PY742PL\npipeline into compliance with § 195.575, within 18 months of receipt of this Final Order.\n8 Buckeye Partners Letter of Decision with Buckeye Partners Special Permit Analysis and Findings, Docket #\nPHMSA 2010-0261, Violation Report at Exhibit A-5.\n9 Response at 2.\n\n\n\n5\n4. Buckeye Partners, L.P. must commence periodic shut-in integrity tests on its PY742PL\npipeline. Respondent must perform the tests at least once every sixteen (16) days. The\ninitial test must be performed within 30 days of receipt of this Final Order. Buckeye\nmust continue to perform these shut-in integrity tests until items 2 and 3 above are\ncompleted. These tests must include, but is not limited to:\na. Suspending operation at a moderate pressure level for one (1) hour and documenting\nthe pressure over that interval; and\nb. Analyzing any pressure variations that occurred during that one (1) hour interval.\n5. Buckeye Partners, L.P. must complete all the above items within the stipulated timeframe\nunless Buckeye abandons this portion of the pipeline. Respondent may abandon this\nportion of the pipeline in accordance to § 195.402(c)(10) and Buckeye’s Operation and\nMaintenance Manual, as appropriate. After Buckeye has abandoned this portion of the\npipeline, Buckeye will no longer be required to comply with this Compliance Order.\n6. Regarding the above items, Buckeye Partners, L.P. must make all related records and\nprocedures available for review by the Director, upon request.\n7. After receipt of this Final Order, Buckeye Partners, L.P. must submit quarterly summary\nreports detailing the actions taken regarding the above Items, with supporting\ndocumentation to the Director, Eastern Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration, 820 Bear Tavern Rd, Suite 103, West Trenton, NJ 08628. Please\nreference CPF# 1-2011-5013 in the title of the quarterly summary reports.\n8. Buckeye Partners, L.P. is requested (not mandated) to maintain documentation of the\nsafety improvement and compliance costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance\nOrder and submit the total to Byron Coy, Director, Eastern Region, Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested that these costs be reported in\ntwo categories: (1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures,\nstudies, and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with replacements, additions, and other\nphysical changes to the pipeline infrastructure.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with the required item upon a written\nrequest timely submitted by the Respondent demonstrating good cause for an extension.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nnot to exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the\nAttorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\n\n\n\n6\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has a 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 this 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. Unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a\nstay, the terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":18592}