{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 12026008NOPV","title":"COLLINS PIPELINE CO — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"current","official":true,"published_on":"2026-03-17","effective_on":null,"summary":"OPEN notice of probable violation citing 195.446(e)(1), 195.446(e)(2), 195.446(e)(3).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12026008nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12026008nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-12026008nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/12026008NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving COLLINS PIPELINE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.446(e)(1),  195.446(e)(2),  195.446(e)(3). The case was opened on 2026-03-17 and is reported as open. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n12026008NOPV_Final Order_04302026_(23-263951).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026008NOPV/12026008NOPV_Final%20Order_04302026_(23-263951).pdf\n\n12026008NOPV_Final Order_04302026_(23-263951)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026008NOPV/12026008NOPV_Final%20Order_04302026_(23-263951)_text.pdf\n\n12026008NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_04152026_(23-263951).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026008NOPV/12026008NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_04152026_(23-263951).pdf\n\n12026008NOPV_PCO_03172026_(23-263951).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026008NOPV/12026008NOPV_PCO_03172026_(23-263951).pdf\n\n12026008NOPV_PCO_03172026_(23-263951)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/12026008NOPV/12026008NOPV_PCO_03172026_(23-263951)_text.pdf\n\n12026008NOPV_Final Order_04302026_(23-263951)_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nApril 30, 2026\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL: matthew.lucey@pbfenergy.com\nMatthew Lucey\nChief Executive Officer and President\nPBF Energy, Inc.\nOne Sylvan Way, 2nd Floor\nParsippany, New Jersey 07054\nRe: CPF No. 1-2026-008-NOPV\nDear Mr. Lucey:\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 to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. When the terms of the compliance order are completed, as determined by the\nDirector, Eastern Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by e-\nmail is effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt as provided\nunder 49 CFR § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nLinda Daugherty\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosures (Final Order and NOPV)\ncc: Robert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nThomas McLane, Director, Logistics Regulatory Compliance, Collins,\nthomas.mclane@pbfenergy.com\nJeff Hersperger, Sr. Operations Director, jeffrey.hersperger@pbfenergy.com\nCONFIRMATION OF 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____________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nCollins Pipeline Company, ) CPF No. 1-2026-008-NOPV\na subsidiary of PBF Energy, Inc., )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn March 17, 2026, pursuant to 49 CFR § 190.207, the Director, Eastern Region, Office of\nPipeline Safety (OPS), issued a Notice of Probable Violation (Notice) to Collins Pipeline\nCompany, a subsidiary of PBF Energy, Inc. (Respondent). The Notice proposed finding that\nRespondent had violated the pipeline safety regulations in 49 CFR Part 195. The Notice also\nproposed certain measures to correct the violations. Respondent did not contest the allegations of\nviolation or corrective measures.\nBased upon a review of all of the evidence, pursuant to section 190.213, I find Respondent\nviolated the pipeline safety regulations listed below, as more fully described in the enclosed\nNotice, which is incorporated by reference:\n49 CFR § 195.446(e)(1) (Item 1) ─ Respondent failed to review its SCADA\nrelated safety-related alarm operations using a process that ensures alarms are\naccurate and support safe pipeline operations.\n49 CFR § 195.446(e)(2) (Item 2) ─ Respondent failed to at least once each\ncalendar month identify points affecting safety that have been taken off scan in\nthe SCADA host, have had alarms inhibited, generated false alarms, or that have\nhad forced or manual values for periods of time exceeding that required for\nassociated maintenance or operating activities.\n49 CFR § 195.446(e)(3) (Item 3) ─ Respondent failed to at least once each\ncalendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months, verify the correct safety-\nrelated alarm set-point values and alarm descriptions when associated field\ninstruments are calibrated or changed.\n\n\n\n2\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nCompliance Actions\nPursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 CFR § 190.217, Respondent is ordered to take the\nactions proposed in the enclosed Notice to correct the violations. The Director may grant an\nextension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a written request timely\nsubmitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an extension. Upon completion\nof the ordered actions, Respondent may request that the Director close the case. Failure to\ncomply with this Order may result in the assessment of civil penalties under 49 CFR § 190.223\nor in referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nThe terms and conditions of this order are effective upon service in accordance with 49 CFR\n§ 190.5.\n___________________________________ _________________________\nLinda Daugherty Date Issued\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and\nHazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n840 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 300\nWest Trenton, NJ 08628\n609.771.7800\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: matthew.lucey@pbfenergy.com\nMarch 17, 2026\nMr. Matthew Lucey\nChief Executive Officer and President\nPBF Energy Inc.\nOne Sylvan Way, 2nd Floor\nParsippany, New Jersey 07054\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\nDear Mr. Lucey:\nFrom December 4, 2023 to March 15, 2024 of the on-site inspection, a representative of the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) inspected Collins Pipeline\nCompany’s (Collins Pipeline)1 control room procedures and records in The Woodlands, Texas.\nAs a result of the inspection, it is alleged that you have committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The items inspected\nand the probable violations are:\n1. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) …\n(e) Alarm management. Each operator using a SCADA system must\nhave a written alarm management plan to provide for effective\ncontroller response to alarms. An operator’s plan must include\nprovisions to:\n1 Collins Pipeline Company is a subsidiary of PBF Energy, Inc.\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\n(1) Review SCADA safety-related alarm operations using a\nprocess that ensures alarms are accurate and support safe pipeline\noperations;\nCollins Pipeline failed to review SCADA safety-related alarm operations using a process that\nensures alarms are accurate and support safe pipeline operations in accordance with section\n195.446(e)(1).\nPHMSA’s review of the alarm management processes in Collins Pipeline’s CRM Plan sections\nL4.1, L6.2, L7, L10, and R7 identified several deficiencies. Notably, the CRM Plan lacked a\ndefined methodology and process for alarm documentation and rationalization (D&R). The\nprocedures functioned more as guidance than as detailed steps for Collins Pipeline’s alarm D&R\nprocess. The written process also failed to include provisions for establishing alarm set-points and\nalarm priorities. In addition, CRM Plan, section R7, referenced a master alarm database, but no\nsuch database existed at the time of inspection.\nAdditionally, Collins Pipeline’s CRM Plan, section G7.2.9, defined three alarm priority levels\nwhich included the priority name, designated color, and audio sound for critical, high, and low\nalarm priorities. However, the CRM Plan had inconsistent alarm color designations. Section\nG.7.2.9 stated that a low alarm priority had a purple color designation, but CRM Plan, section\nO4.3.2 stated a low alarm priority had a teal color designation.\nThe CRM Plan also identified and defined “Alerts.” CRM Plan, section L, appendix B stated that\nan alert is “[a]n audible and/or visible means of indicating to the Controller an equipment or\nprocess condition that requires awareness, and that action may be needed when time permits.\nSimilarly, alerts are separated from the alarm system and are generally Controller-configurable,”\nand section A2.3 defined alert as “[a]n announcement of an event that does not necessitate speedy\naction; Alerts are always of lower priority than alarms and should at no time be safety related.”\nHowever, the role of alerts in the CRM Plan is unclear due to language in sections L9.7, L10 and\nL12 related to operator alert systems or controller alerts. The language in these sections resemble\ngeneral guidance for alarm system and handling rather than a process for the use of alerts, which\nare supposed to be distinct from alarms.\nTherefore, Collins Pipeline failed to review SCADA safety-related alarm operations using a\nprocess that ensures alarms are accurate and support safe pipeline operations in accordance with\nsection 195.446(e)(1).\n2. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) …\n(e) Alarm management. Each operator using a SCADA system must\nhave a written alarm management plan to provide for effective\ncontroller response to alarms. An operator’s plan must include\nprovisions to:\n(1) …\n(2) Identify at least once each calendar month points affecting\nsafety that have been taken off scan in the SCADA host, have had\nPage 2 of 7\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\nalarms inhibited, generated false alarms, or that have had forced or\nmanual values for periods of time exceeding that required for\nassociated maintenance or operating activities;\nCollins Pipeline failed to identify at least once each calendar month points affecting safety that\nhave been taken off scan in the SCADA host, have had alarms inhibited, generated false alarms,\nor that have had forced or manual values for periods of time exceeding that required for associated\nmaintenance or operating activities in accordance with section 195.446(e)(2). In addition, Collins\nPipeline failed to have an adequate procedure to support this monthly review in accordance with\nsection 194.446(a).\nCollins Pipeline’s PBF Logistics Pipeline Control Center: Control Room Management Plan, Rev-\n8 (08/25/23) (CRM Plan) included multiple sections (A6.1.2, A6.5, L1, and M2.16) where it\nrequired the monthly reviews of alarms, however these sections failed to include instructions or\ndetails as to how this activity would be performed and recorded to demonstrate compliance.\nCollins Pipeline contracted with a third-party control room vendor to complete the monthly alarm\nreview. Collins Pipeline downloaded alarms from its event log and provided them to the third party\nfor review. A review of the third-party’s monthly reports for August 2021, November 2021, March\n2022, April 2022 for consoles 1 and 2 showed the alarm data related to Collins Pipeline’s Key\nPerformance Indicators. The reviewed records contained no reports or other documentation\nindicating any safety-related points had been taken off scan in the SCADA host, had generated\nfalse alarms, or had been left in forced or manual values for periods of time exceeding that required\nfor associated maintenance or operating activities.\nTherefore, Collins Pipeline failed to identify at least once each calendar month points affecting\nsafety that have been taken off scan in the SCADA host, have had alarms inhibited, generated false\nalarms, or that have had forced or manual values for periods of time exceeding that required for\nassociated maintenance or operating activities as required by section 195.446(e)(2).\n3. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) …\n(e) Alarm management. Each operator using a SCADA system must\nhave a written alarm management plan to provide for effective\ncontroller response to alarms. An operator’s plan must include\nprovisions to:\n(1) …\n(3) Verify the correct safety-related alarm set-point values and\nalarm descriptions when associated field instruments are\ncalibrated or changed and at least once each calendar year, but at\nintervals not to exceed 15 months;\nCollins Pipeline failed to verify the correct safety-related alarm set-point values and alarm\ndescriptions when associated field instruments are calibrated or changed and at least once each\ncalendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months in accordance with section 195.446(e)(3).\nPage 3 of 7\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\nCollins Pipeline’s CRM Plan included multiple sections (A6.1.4, A6.6, L1, and M2.15) where it\nrequired review of the safety-related alarms, set-point values, and alarm descriptions. However,\nthese sections failed to include instructions or details as to how this activity would be performed\nand recorded to demonstrate compliance.\nPHMSA reviewed records for the annual verification of safety-related alarm set point values and\nalarm descriptions, but these records did not indicate who completed the review, when the review\nwas completed, and whether any deficiencies were identified and corrected. In addition, Collins\nPipeline failed to provide records demonstrating it had verified the same information when field\ninstruments were calibrated or changed.\nTherefore, Collins Pipeline failed to verify the correct safety-related alarm set-point values and\nalarm descriptions when associated field instruments are calibrated or changed and at least once\neach calendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months in accordance with section\n195.446(e)(3).\nProposed Civil Penalty\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$272,926 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,729,245 for a related\nseries of violations. For violation occurring on or after December 28, 2023 and before December\n30, 2024, the maximum penalty may not exceed $266,015 per violation per day the violation\npersists, up to a maximum of $2,660,135 for a related series of violations. For violation occurring\non or after January 6, 2023 and before December 28, 2023, the maximum penalty may not exceed\n$257,664 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,576,627 for a related\nseries of violations. For violation occurring on or after March 21, 2022 and before January 6, 2023,\nthe maximum penalty may not exceed $239,142 per violation per day the violation persists, up to\na maximum of $2,391,412 for a related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after\nMay 3, 2021 and before March 21, 2022, the maximum penalty may not exceed $225,134 per\nviolation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,251,334 for a related series of\nviolations. For violation occurring on or after January 11, 2021 and before May 3, 2021, the\nmaximum penalty may not exceed $222,504 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a\nmaximum of $2,225,034 for a related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after July\n31, 2019 and before January 11, 2021, the maximum penalty may not exceed $218,647 per\nviolation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for a related series of\nviolations.\nWe have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case and have\ndecided not to propose a civil penalty assessment at this time.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to Items 1, 2, and 3, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Collins Pipeline. Please\nrefer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a part of this Notice.\nPage 4 of 7\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\nResponse to this Notice\nEnclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in\nEnforcement Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. All\nmaterial you submit in response to this enforcement action may be made publicly available. If you\nbelieve that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5\nU.S.C. § 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of\nthe document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an\nexplanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under\n5 U.S.C. § 552(b).\nFollowing your receipt of this Notice, you have 30 days to respond as described in the enclosed\nResponse Options. If you do not respond within 30 days of receipt of this Notice, this constitutes\na waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice and authorizes the Associate\nAdministrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further notice to\nyou and to issue a Final Order. If you are responding to this Notice, we propose that you submit\nyour correspondence to my office within 30 days from receipt of this Notice. The Region Director\nmay extend the period for responding upon a written request timely submitted demonstrating good\ncause for an extension.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 1-2026-008-NOPV and, for each\ndocument you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\nSincerely,\nRobert Burrough\nDirector, Eastern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Thomas McLane, Director Logistics Regulatory Compliance,\nthomas.mclane@pbfenergy.com\nJeff Hersperger, Sr. Operations Director, jeffrey.hersperger@pbfenergy.com\nEnclosures: Proposed Compliance Order\nResponse Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement Proceedings\nPage 5 of 7\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nPursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Collins Pipeline Company (Collins Pipeline) a\nCompliance Order incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of\nCollins Pipeline with the pipeline safety regulations:\nA. In regard to Item 1 of the Notice pertaining to Collins Pipeline’s failure to review\nSCADA safety-related alarm operations using a process that ensures alarms are\naccurate and support safe pipeline operations, Collins Pipeline must:\n1. Revise its CRM Plan to include an adequate process that ensures alarms are\naccurate and support safe pipeline operations. Collins Pipeline must provide\nthe revised procedures and forms to the Director for review and approval\nwithin 90 days of receipt of the Final Order.\n2. Collins Pipeline must provide documentation of its safety related alarm\nvalues and set point descriptions under the revised procedures to the\nDirector for review within 150 days of receipt of the Final Order.\nB. In regard to Item 2 of the Notice pertaining to Collins Pipeline’s failure to verify\nthe correct safety-related alarm set-point values and alarm descriptions when\nassociated field instruments are calibrated or changed and at least once each\ncalendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months Collins Pipeline must:\n1. Revise its CRM Plan to include an adequate process to conduct the set point\nreview. Collins Pipeline must provide the revised procedures and forms to\nthe Director for review and approval within 90 days of receipt of the Final\nOrder.\n2. Collins Pipeline must provide documentation of its alarm rationalization\nincluding alarm priorities and set points to the Director for review within\n150 days of receipt of the Final Order.\nC. In regard to Item 3 of the Notice pertaining Collins Pipeline’s failure to identify at\nleast once each calendar month points affecting safety that have been taken off scan\nin the SCADA host, have had alarms inhibited, generated false alarms, or that have\nhad forced or manual values for periods of time exceeding that required for\nassociated maintenance or operating activities, Collins Pipeline must:\n1. Revise its CRM Plan to include an adequate process to conduct the monthly\nalarm review. Collins Pipeline must provide the revised procedures and\nforms to the Director for review and approval within 90 days of receipt of\nthe Final Order.\n2. Collins Pipeline must provide two months of records of its reviews utilizing\nthe revised procedures and forms to the Director for review within 150 days\nof receipt of the Final Order.\nPage 6 of 7\n\n\n\nCPF 1-2026-008-NOPV\nD. It is requested (not mandated) that Collins Pipeline maintain documentation of the\nsafety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and\nsubmit the total to Robert Burrough, Director, Eastern Region, Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested that these costs be\nreported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of\nplans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nPage 7 of 7","truncated":false,"body_characters":21240}