# SUNOCO PIPELINE L.P. — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 120195002
- **title:** SUNOCO PIPELINE L.P. — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2019-02-04
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.571, 195.589(c).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120195002.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120195002.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120195002
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120195002
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving SUNOCO PIPELINE L.P.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.571,  195.589(c). The case was opened on 2019-02-04 and is reported as closed as of 2019-11-26. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

120195002_Closure Letter_11262019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_Closure%20Letter_11262019.pdf

120195002_Closure Letter_11262019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_Closure%20Letter_11262019_text.pdf

120195002_Final Order_08092019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_Final%20Order_08092019.pdf

120195002_Final Order_08092019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_Final%20Order_08092019_text.pdf

120195002_NOPV PCO_02042019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_NOPV%20PCO_02042019.pdf

120195002_NOPV PCO_02042019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_NOPV%20PCO_02042019_text.pdf

120195002_Operator_Response to Notice_03062019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195002/120195002_Operator_Response%20to%20Notice_03062019.pdf

120195002_Final Order_08092019_text.pdf

August 9, 2019
Mr. Kelcy L. Warren
Chief Executive Officer
Energy Transfer Partners, LP
8111 Westchester Drive
Dallas, Texas 75225
Re: CPF No. 1-2019-5002
Dear Mr. Warren:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case against your subsidiary
Sunoco Pipeline, LP. It makes findings of violation and specifies actions that need to be taken
by Sunoco Pipeline, LP, to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the
compliance order have been completed, as determined by the Director, Eastern Region, this
enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is effective upon
the date of mailing, as provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Alan K. Mayberry
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Robert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA
Mr. Greg McIlwain, Senior Vice President, Operations, Sunoco Pipeline, LP, 1300 Main
Street, Houston, Texas 77002
Mr. Todd Nardozzi, Senior Manager, DOT Compliance, Energy Transfer Partners, LP,
8111 Westchester Drive, Dallas, Texas 75225
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
__________________________________________
In the Matter of )
Sunoco Pipeline, LP, )
a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners, LP, ) CPF No. 1-2019-5002
)
)
)
Respondent. )
__________________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
From March 19 to March 23, 2018, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives of the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety
(OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Sunoco
Pipeline, LP’s (Sunoco or Respondent), Mariner East 1 (ME1) pipeline system, in Honeybrook,
Pennsylvania. The Mariner East pipeline project transports natural gas liquids from the
Marcellus and Utica Shales areas in Western Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Eastern Ohio to
destinations in Pennsylvania, including the Marcus Hook Industrial Complex on the Delaware
River, where they are processed, stored and distributed to local, domestic and waterborne
markets. The first phase of the project, referred to as ME1, consisted of interstate and intrastate
propane and ethane service and commenced operations in the fourth quarter of 2014 and the first
quarter of 2016, respectively.1 Sunoco Pipeline, LP, is a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners,
LP.2
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,
by letter dated February 4, 2019, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order
(Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Sunoco had
violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.571 and 195.589(c) and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain
measures to correct the alleged violations.
Sunoco responded to the Notice by letter dated March 6, 2019 (Response) and submitted a
supplemental response by email on May 30, 2019. The company did not contest the allegations
of violation, but provided information concerning the corrective actions it had taken.
Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.
1 See http://www.sunocologistics.com/Customers/Business-Lines/Natural-Gas-Liquids-NGLs/257/ (last accessed
June 3, 2019).
2 See http://www.sunocologistics.com/ (last visited June 3, 2019).



CPF No. 1-2019-5002
Page 2
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
In its Response, Sunoco did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.
Part 195, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.571, which states:
§ 195.571 What criteria must I use to determine the adequacy of cathodic
protection?
Cathodic protection required by this subpart must comply with one or
more of the applicable criteria and other considerations for cathodic
protection contained [in] paragraphs 6.2.2, 6.2.3, 6.2.4, 6.2.5 and 6.3 in
NACE SP 0169 (incorporated by reference, see § 195.3).3
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.571 by failing to provide cathodic
protection on ME1 that complies with one or more of the applicable NACE SP 0169 - 2007
edition (SP 0169) criteria and other considerations. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Sunoco
failed to consider voltage (IR) drops other than those across the structure-to-electrolyte boundary
when applying SP 0169’s Section 6.2.2.1.1 -850 mV criterion during its annual cathodic
protection testing.
During the inspection, PHMSA reviewed annual cathodic protection survey records for 2015-
2017 for the ME1 system. PHMSA noted that no IR Free readings were provided when utilizing
the -850 mV SP 0169 criterion found in Section 6.2.2.1.1. Additionally, Sunoco did not provide
a valid explanation for how IR drop was being considered when evaluating the adequacy of the
readings that were taken.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.571 by failing to provide
cathodic protection on the ME1 pipeline that complies with one or more of the applicable SP
0169 criteria and other considerations.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.589(c), which states:
§ 195.589 What corrosion control information do I have to maintain?
(a)…
(c) You must maintain a record of each analysis, check, demonstration,
examination, inspection, investigation, review, survey, and test required by
this subpart in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion
3 SP 0169 Section 6.2.2.1.1 describes the -850 m V criterion for steel and cast-iron piping as follows: “A negative
(cathodic) potential of at least 850 mV with the cathodic protection current applied. This potential is measured with
respect to a saturated copper/copper sulfate electrode contacting the electrolyte. Voltage drops other than those
across the structure-to-electrolyte boundary must be considered for valid interpretation of this voltage
measurement.”



CPF No. 1-2019-5002
Page 3
control measures or that corrosion requiring control measures does not
exist. You must retain these records for at least 5 years, except that records
related to §§ 195.569, 195.573(a) and (b), and 195.579(b)(3) and (c) must
be retained for as long as the pipeline remains in service.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.589(c) by failing to maintain
records in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion control measures.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that Sunoco failed to provide records that demonstrate how the
cathodic protection measures for ME1 complied with the applicable SP 0169 criteria at certain
test stations.
During the inspection, cathodic protection survey records for 2015-2017 were provided by
Sunoco for ME1. PHMSA noted that the recorded pipe-to-soil potential readings were below the
SP 0169 -850 mV criterion from 2015 to 2017 at several test stations. In discussions with
Sunoco personnel, PHMSA established that IR Free readings were not taken when utilizing the
-850 mV SP 0169 criterion found in Section 6.2.2.1.1. Instead, Sunoco stated that net protective
current surveys were performed at the locations to establish compliance, due to its inability to
achieve a reading that complies with the -850 mV criterion. In conjunction with these surveys,
Sunoco also performed reviews of historical in-line inspection data in the area of the test stations.
However, Sunoco was unable to explain how the data provided demonstrates adequate cathodic
protection that meets the special considerations or accounts for the precautionary notes about the
earth current technique required in SP 0169.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.589(c) by failing to maintain
records in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion control measures.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1 and 2 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.571 and 195.589(c), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a),
each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a
pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under
chapter 601. The Director indicated that Respondent has taken the following actions to address
some of the cited violations:
With respect to the violation of § 195.571 (Item 1), Sunoco provided documentation from
Pipeline ID 12124 showing that it had performed the required close interval surveys of the ME1.
On May 30, 2019, Sunoco provided additional documents verifying that the close interval
surveys were conducted on Pipeline ID 11190.



CPF No. 1-2019-5002
Page 4
Accordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore,
the compliance terms proposed in the Notice for Item 1 are not included in this Order.
As for the remaining compliance terms, pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 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:
2. With respect to the violation of § 195.589(c) (Item 2), Respondent must:
a. Maintain adequate records to demonstrate that the test stations listed in Item 2
of the Notice satisfy one or more criteria listed in SP 0169.
b. Develop a written plan to remediate all deficiencies in cathodic protection
identified from the survey of the ME1 discussed above. This plan and the records
required by 2(a) shall be provided to PHMSA within 60 days of receipt of this Final
Order. The plan shall prioritize any of the specific test stations in Item 2 that fail to
meet criteria.
If Respondent believes it has satisfied one or more of the items ordered above, Respondent may
request confirmation from the Director that such items have been completed.
The Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a
written request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an
extension.
It is requested (not mandated) that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety
improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the
Director. It is requested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated
with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated
with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
not to exceed $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (49 C.F.R. § 190.223), for each violation for
each day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a
district court of the United States.
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final
Order to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of
Chief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address, no later than 20 days after receipt of service of this
Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a statement of the issue(s) and
meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The terms of the order, including corrective
action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a stay.



CPF No. 1-2019-5002
Page 5
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49
C.F.R. § 190.5.
August 9, 2019
___________________________________ __________________________
Alan K. Mayberry Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety

120195002_Closure Letter_11262019_text.pdf

OVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY
November 26, 2019
Mr. Greg McIlwain
Senior Vice President, Operations
Sunoco Pipeline L.P.
1300 Main Street
Houston, TX 77002
CPF 1-2019-5002
Dear Mr. McIlwain:
On August 9, 2019, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued
to Sunoco Pipeline, LP, a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners, LP, a Final Order in the above-
referenced case. This Order included a Compliance Order. Based on our review of the
documentation you provided, it has been determined that you have complied with the terms of this
Order.
Accordingly, this case is now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to the
matters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Robert Burrough
Director, Eastern Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 14549
