{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120195010M","title":"ENERGY TRANSFER COMPANY — Notice of Amendment","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2019-11-26","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of amendment citing 195.12(e)(1), 195.12(f), 195.402(a), 195.402(c)(3), 195.402(e)(6).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120195010m.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120195010m.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120195010m","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120195010M","body":"Notice of Amendment involving ENERGY TRANSFER COMPANY. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.12(e)(1),  195.12(f),  195.402(a),  195.402(c)(3),  195.402(e)(6). The case was opened on 2019-11-26 and is reported as closed as of 2020-03-06. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120195010M_Closure Letter_03062020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195010M/120195010M_Closure%20Letter_03062020.pdf\n\n120195010M_Closure Letter_03062020_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195010M/120195010M_Closure%20Letter_03062020_text.pdf\n\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195010M/120195010M_Notice%20of%20Amendment_11262019.pdf\n\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195010M/120195010M_Notice%20of%20Amendment_11262019_text.pdf\n\n120195010M_Operator Response to Notice_01202020.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120195010M/120195010M_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_01202020.pdf\n\n120195010M_Closure Letter_03062020_text.pdf\n\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY\nMarch 6, 2020\nMr. Eric Amundsen\nSenior VP, Operations\nEnergy Transfer Company\n1300 Main Street\nHouston, Texas 77002\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\nDear Mr. Amundsen:\nFrom September 10 - 12, 2019, a representative from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), conducted\nan on-site pipeline safety inspection of Energy Transfer Company’s (ETC) procedures for\noperations and maintenance in Houston, Texas. As a result of the inspection, ETC was issued a\nNotice of Amendment on November 26, 2019, which proposed amendment of your procedures.\nOn December 27, 2019, ETC requested an extension of time until February 19, 2020 to respond.\nOn January 2, 2020, PHMSA granted the time extension. ETC submitted its amended procedures\non February 19, 2020. My staff reviewed the amended procedures, and it appears that the\ninadequacies outlined in this Notice of Amendment have been corrected.\nThis letter is to inform you no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank you\nfor your cooperation.\nSincerely,\nRobert Burrough\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF AMENDMENT\nOVERNIGHT EXPRESS DELIVERY\nNovember 26, 2019\nMr. Eric Amundsen\nSenior VP, Operations\nEnergy Transfer Company\n1300 Main Street\nHouston, Texas 77002\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\nDear Mr. Amundsen:\nFrom September 10-12, 2019, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), inspected\nEnergy Transfer Company (ETC)’s procedures for operations & maintenance in Houston, Texas.\nOn the basis of the inspection, PHMSA has identified the apparent inadequacies found within\nETC’s plans or procedures, as described below:\n1. § 195.12 What requirements apply to low-stress pipelines in rural areas?\n(a) …\n(e) Changes in unusually sensitive areas.\n(1) If, after June 3, 2008, for Category 1 rural low-stress pipelines or October 1,\n2011 for Category 2 rural low-stress pipelines, an operator identifies a new USA that\ncauses a segment of pipeline to meet the criteria in paragraph (b) of this Section as a\nCategory 1 or Category 2 rural low-stress pipeline, the operator must:\n(i) Comply with the IM program requirement in paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(A) or\n(c)(2)(iii)(A) of this Section, as appropriate, within 12 months following the date the\narea is identified regardless of the prior categorization of the pipeline; and\n(ii) Complete the baseline assessment required by paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(C) or\n(c)(2)(iii)(C) of this Section, as appropriate, according to the schedule in\n§ 195.452(d)(3).\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities and\nhandling abnormal operations and emergencies for each pipeline system were inadequate.\nSpecifically, ETC’s procedures failed to require that changes in unusually sensitive areas (USAs)\nbe handled in accordance with § 195.12(e).\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to § 195.12(e).\nETC provided its Determination of Regulated Gathering Pipelines – HLA.06, dated 04/01/18\n(Procedure). The Procedure did not include adequate details which specified ETC’s process to\nidentify changes in USAs. The PHMSA inspectors asked ETC where the applicable information\nwas documented and ETC was not able to provide a response.\nTherefore, ETC’s procedures failed to include adequate details, per the requirements of\n§ 195.12(e).\n2. § 195.12 What requirements apply to low-stress pipelines in rural areas?\n(a) …\n(f) Record Retention. An operator must maintain records demonstrating\ncompliance with each requirement applicable to the category of pipeline according to\nthe following schedule.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities and\nhandling abnormal operations and emergencies for each pipeline system were inadequate.\nSpecifically, ETC’s procedures failed to require records be kept in accordance with § 195.12(f).\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to § 195.12(f).\nETC provided its DOT Record Keeping – HLA.22, dated 04/01/18 (Procedure). ETC does not\nhave procedures or record requirements for low stress pipelines in rural areas. The PHMSA\ninspectors asked ETC where the applicable information was documented and ETC was not able to\nprovide a response.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include adequate details in its procedures, per the requirements of\n§ 195.12(f).\n3. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline system a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance\nactivities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies. This manual shall be\nreviewed at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year,\nand appropriate changes made as necessary to insure that the manual is effective.\nThis manual shall be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline system\ncommence, and appropriate parts shall be kept at locations where operations and\nmaintenance activities are conducted.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities and\nhandling abnormal operations and emergencies for each pipeline system were inadequate.\nSpecifically, ETC’s procedures failed to include sufficient guidance for emergency response\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 2 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\nsupervisors to be knowledgeable of emergency response procedures for which they are\nresponsible, per the requirements of § 195.403(c).\nSection 195.403(c) states:\nEach operator shall require and verify that its supervisors maintain a thorough knowledge\nof that portion of the emergency response procedures established under § 195.402 for\nwhich they are responsible to ensure compliance.\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to\n§ 195.403(c). ETC provided its Emergency Response Training Exercises – HLA.10, dated\n02/01/18 (Procedure). The Procedure did not include adequate details on the following:\n• Defining Emergency response supervisor role\n• Emergency response supervisor training requirements\n• Emergency response supervisor knowledge verification requirements\n• Training and knowledge verification documentation\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors asked ETC where the applicable information was\ndocumented and ETC was not able to provide a response.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include guidance in its procedures for emergency response supervisors,\nper the requirements of § 195.403(c).\n4. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) …\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a)\nof this section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(1) …\n(3) Operating, maintaining, and repairing the pipeline system in accordance with\neach of the requirements of this subpart and subpart H of this part.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities for each\npipeline system were inadequate. Specifically, ETC’s procedures failed to include details\ndescribing the interval and method for performing ultrasonic thickness inspections of breakout\ntanks in accordance with the incorporated by reference version of API Standard 653 (API 653) and\n§ 195.432(b).\nSection 195.432(b) states:\nEach operator must inspect the physical integrity of in-service atmospheric and low-\npressure steel above-ground breakout tanks according to API Std 653 (except section\n6.4.3, Alternative Internal Inspection Interval) (incorporated by reference, see § 195.3).\nHowever, if structural conditions prevent access to the tank bottom, its integrity may be\nassessed according to a plan included in the operations and maintenance manual under\n§ 195.402(c)(3). The risk- based internal inspection procedures in API Std 653, section\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 3 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\n6.4.3 cannot be used to determine the internal inspection interval.\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures for inspecting in-\nservice breakout tanks, to include performing ultrasonic inspections of tank shells. ETC\nprovided its Inspection of In-Service Breakout Tanks – HLA.05, dated 04/01/18 (Procedure).\nThe Procedure Section 4.0 stated, “Every 15 years Max: Ultrasonic inspection.”\nThe Procedure did not include adequate details on the following:\n• Ultrasonic thickness inspection interval when the corrosion rate is not known,\nper API 653 Section 6.3.3.2(a)\n• Ultrasonic thickness inspection interval when the corrosion rate is known, per\nAPI 653 Section 6.3.3.2(b)\n• Process for what is checked/tested during an ultrasonic thickness inspection\nTherefore, ETC failed to include adequate details in its procedures that describe the interval and\nmethod for performing ultrasonic thickness inspections of breakout tanks, per the requirements of\n§ 195.432(b).\n5. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) …\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a)\nof this section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(1) …\n(3) Operating, maintaining, and repairing the pipeline system in accordance with\neach of the requirements of this subpart and subpart H of this part.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities for each\npipeline system were inadequate. Specifically, ETC’s procedures failed to include sufficient\nguidance for corrosion control supervisors to maintain a thorough knowledge of corrosion control\nprocedures for which they are responsible, per the requirements of § 195.555.\nSection 195.555 states:\nYou must require and verify that supervisors maintain a thorough knowledge of that\nportion of the corrosion control procedures established under § 195.402(c)(3) for which\nthey are responsible for insuring compliance.\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to\n§ 195.555. ETC provided its Corrosion Control Supervisor Qualifications – HLD.01, dated\n04/01/18 (Procedure). The Procedure did not include adequate details on the following:\n• Defining corrosion control supervisor role\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 4 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\n• Corrosion control supervisor training requirements\n• Corrosion control supervisor knowledge verification requirements\n• Training and knowledge verification documentation\nThe PHMSA inspectors asked ETC where the applicable information was documented and ETC\nwas not able to provide a response.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include guidance in its procedures for emergency response supervisors,\nper the requirements of § 195.555.\n6. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) …\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a)\nof this section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(1) …\n(3) Operating, maintaining, and repairing the pipeline system in accordance with\neach of the requirements of this subpart and subpart H of this part.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance for each pipeline\nsystem were inadequate. Specifically, ETC’s procedures failed to give sufficient guidance to\nprotect pipelines against damage from fault currents or lightning.\nSection 195.575(e) states:\nIf a pipeline is in close proximity to electrical transmission tower footings, ground\ncables, or counterpoise, or in other areas where it is reasonable to foresee fault currents\nor an unusual risk of lightning, you must protect the pipeline against damage from fault\ncurrents or lightning and take protective measures at insulating devices.\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to\n§ 195.575(e). ETC provided its Induced AC Measurement and Mitigation – HLD.23, dated\n04/01/18 (Procedure). The Procedure Section 7.1 stated, “…Note: Corrosion damage from\ninduced AC on older pipelines is unlikely. AC corrosion may be a concern on newer pipelines with\ncoating systems such extruded PE and FBE Damage as the result of lightning is usually a result of\n“arcing” or “melting” of the metal. A high current flow in a pipeline caused by lightning or fault\ncurrents can cause pipe wall penetration and insulator destruction.”\nThe Procedure, however, did not give sufficient guidance for determining when protection against\ndamage from fault currents or lightning is needed and how that protection must be installed.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include adequate details in its procedures, per the requirements of\n§ 195.575(e).\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 5 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\n7. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) …\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a)\nof this section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(1) …\n(3) Operating, maintaining, and repairing the pipeline system in accordance with\neach of the requirements of this subpart and subpart H of this part.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance for each pipeline\nsystem were inadequate. Specifically, ETC’s procedures failed to direct personnel to examine\nremoved pipe for evidence of internal corrosion in accordance with § 195.579(c).\nSection 195.579(c) states:\nRemoving pipe. Whenever you remove pipe from a pipeline, you must inspect the\ninternal surface of the pipe for evidence of corrosion. If you find internal corrosion\nrequiring corrective action under § 195.585, you must investigate circumferentially and\nlongitudinally beyond the removed pipe (by visual examination, indirect method, or\nboth) to determine whether additional corrosion requiring remedial action exists in the\nvicinity of the removed pipe.\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to\n§ 195.579(c). ETC provided its Buried Pipe Inspections – HLD.35, dated 08/01/19 (Procedure).\nThe Procedure did not provide requirements for ETC to inspect the internal surface of the pipe for\nevidence of corrosion whenever pipe is removed from a pipeline. The Procedure also did not\nprovide details for, if internal corrosion is found, how ETC requires corrective actions under\n§ 195.585 to investigate circumferentially and longitudinally beyond the removed pipe (by visual\nexamination, indirect method, or both) to determine whether additional corrosion requiring\nremedial action exists in the vicinity of the removed pipe.\nThe PHMSA inspectors also reviewed ETC’s Pipeline Inspection G-Form – D.35.A, which is a\nform where ETC appears to document the results of internal corrosion inspections of removed\npipe. The G-Form includes a question stating “Was an Internal Inspection Performed?” The G-\nForm did not contain any definition or explanation of any evaluation or grading related to internal\ncorrosion found during pipe inspections, nor did the Procedure.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include adequate details in its procedures, per the requirements of\n§ 195.402(a).\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 6 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\n8. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) …\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a)\nof this section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(1) …\n(3) Operating, maintaining, and repairing the pipeline system in accordance with\neach of the requirements of this subpart and subpart H of this part.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities for each\npipeline system were inadequate. Specifically, ETC’s procedures failed to include requirements\nfor each buried or submerged pipeline to have an external coating for external corrosion control in\naccordance with § 195.557(a).\nSection 195.557(a) states:\nExcept bottoms of aboveground breakout tanks, each buried or submerged pipeline must\nhave an external coating for external corrosion control if the pipeline is -\nConstructed, relocated, replaced, or otherwise changed after the applicable date in\n§195.401(c), not including the movement of pipe covered by § 195.424;\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested ETC’s procedures relative to\n§ 195.557(a). ETC provided its Buried Pipe Inspections – HLD.35, dated 08/01/19 and\nInvestigation of Pipeline Anomalies, dated 04/01/18 (Procedure).\nThe Procedure did not provide requirements for each buried or submerged pipeline to have an\nexternal coating for external corrosion control if the pipeline is constructed, relocated, replaced, or\notherwise changed after the applicable date in § 195.401(c), as required by § 195.557(a). The\nPHMSA inspectors asked ETC where the applicable information was documented and ETC was\nnot able to provide a response.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include adequate details in its procedures regarding the requirements of\n§ 195.557(a).\n9. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) …\n(e) Emergencies. The manual required by paragraph (a) of this section must\ninclude procedures for the following to provide safety when an emergency condition\noccurs:\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 7 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\n(1) …\n(6) Minimization of public exposure to injury and probability of accidental\nignition by assisting with evacuation of residents and assisting with halting traffic on\nroads and railroads in the affected area, or taking other appropriate action.\nETC’s written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities and\nhandling abnormal operations and emergencies for each pipeline system were inadequate.\nSpecifically, ETC’s procedures failed to include details for minimizing public exposure to injury\nand probability of accidental ignition in accordance with § 195.402(e)(6).\nDuring the inspection, the PHMSA inspectors requested procedures relative to § 195.402(e)(6).\nETC provided its Field Emergency Response Procedures – HLA.08, dated 11/01/15 (Procedure).\nThe Procedure failed to include details on minimizing public exposure to injury and probability of\naccidental ignition, including provisions for assisting with evacuation of residents and assisting\nwith halting traffic on roads and railroads in the affected area, or taking other appropriate actions.\nTherefore, ETC failed to include adequate guidance in its procedures regarding § 195.402(e)(6).\nResponse to this Notice\nThis Notice is provided pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60108(a) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.206. Enclosed as\npart of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement\nProceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be advised that all\nmaterial you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly\navailable. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential\ntreatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a\nsecond copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment\nredacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential\ntreatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nFollowing the receipt of this Notice, you have 30 days to submit written comments, revised\nprocedures, or a request for a hearing under §190.211. If you do not respond within 30 days of\nreceipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice\nand authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice\nwithout further notice to you and to issue an Order Directing Amendment. If your plans or\nprocedures are found inadequate as alleged in this Notice, you may be ordered to amend your plans\nor procedures to correct the inadequacies (49 C.F.R. § 190.206). If you are not contesting this\nNotice, we propose that you submit your amended procedures to my office within 60 days of\nreceipt of this Notice. This period may be extended by written request for good cause. Once the\ninadequacies identified herein have been addressed in your amended procedures, this enforcement\naction will be closed.\nIt is requested (not mandated) that Energy Transfer Company maintain documentation of the safety\nimprovement costs associated with fulfilling this Notice of Amendment (preparation/revision of\nplans, procedures) and submit the total to Robert Burrough, Director, PHMSA Eastern Region,\n840 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 300, West Trenton, NJ 08628. Please refer to CPF 1-2019-5010M\non each document you submit, and whenever possible provide a signed PDF copy in electronic\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 8 of 9\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2019-5010M\nformat. Smaller files may be emailed to robert.burrough@dot.gov. Larger files should be sent on\nUSB flash drive accompanied by the original paper copy to the Eastern Region Office.\nAdditionally, if you choose to respond to this (or any other case), please ensure that any response\nletter pertains solely to one CPF case number.\nSincerely,\nRobert Burrough\nDirector, Eastern Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nEnclosure: Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement Proceedings\n120195010M_Notice of Amendment_11262019_text Page 9 of 9","truncated":false,"body_characters":23120}