{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 220136005W","title":"CONTINUUM MIDSTREAM LLC — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2013-09-04","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.406(a)(3), 195.440(a), 195.442(a), 195.505(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220136005w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220136005w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220136005w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/220136005W","body":"Warning Letter involving CONTINUUM MIDSTREAM LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.406(a)(3),  195.440(a),  195.442(a),  195.505(a). The case was opened on 2013-09-04 and is reported as closed as of 2013-09-04. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n220136005W_warning letter_09042013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220136005W/220136005W_warning%20letter_09042013.pdf\n\n220136005W_warning letter_09042013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220136005W/220136005W_warning%20letter_09042013_text.pdf\n\n220136005W_warning letter_09042013_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nSeptember 4, 2013\nMr. Jason Few\nChief Executive Officer\nSeminole Gas Company\n1323 E 71st Street, Suite 300\nTulsa, OK 74136\nCPF 2-2013-6005W\nDear Mr. Few:\nFrom April 1-3, 2013, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) inspected the Seminole Gas Company’s (Seminole’s) Seminole\nMurphy Liquids Terminal (SMLT) pipeline in Bulls Gap, Tennessee, pursuant to Chapter 601\nof 49 United States Code.\nAs a result of the inspection, it appears that Seminole has committed probable violations of\nthe Pipeline Safety Regulations, in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The items\ninspected and the probable violations are as follows:\n1. §195.406 Maximum operating pressure.\n(a) Except for surge pressures and other variations from normal operations, no\noperator may operate a pipeline at a pressure that exceeds any of the following:\n... (3) Eighty percent of the test pressure for any part of the pipeline which has been\npressure tested under Subpart E of this part.\nSeminole incorrectly determined the Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP) of its SMLT\npipeline to be 800 psig using 80% of 1,000 psig from the 8-hour pressure test conducted\non May 19-20, 2009. PHMSA inspectors reviewed the pressure test charts and found the\nhighest test pressure held continuously for 4 hours during the pressure test was\napproximately 980 psig, not 1,000 psig. [Note: PHMSA inspectors also noted that the\noperating pressure on the SMLT pipeline did not actually exceed the MOP of the\npipeline.]\n2. §195.442 Damage Prevention Program.\n\n\n\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, each operator of a buried\npipeline must carry out, in accordance with this section, a written program to\nprevent damage to that pipeline from excavation activities. For the purpose of this\nsection, the term \"excavation activities\" includes excavation, blasting, boring,\ntunneling, backfilling, the removal of aboveground structures by either explosive or\nmechanical means, and other earthmoving operations.\nSeminole's Hazardous Liquid Operations, Maintenance and Emergency Manual\n(HLOMEM) did not have a fully developed written program to prevent damage to its\npipeline from excavation activities. That is, Seminole paraphrased (or mimicked) the\nfederal pipeline safety regulations in §195.442(c) instead of developing a written program\nto prevent damage to the pipeline from excavation activities as required by the code.\n3. §195.440 Public awareness.\n(a) Each pipeline operator must develop and implement a written continuing public\neducation program that follows the guidance provided in the American Petroleum\nInstitute's (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 1162 (incorporated by reference, see\n§ 195.3).\n… (f) The program and the media used must be as comprehensive as necessary to\nreach all areas in which the operator transports hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide.\n… (g) The program must be conducted in English and in other languages commonly\nunderstood by a significant number and concentration of the non-English speaking\npopulation in the operator's area.\nSeminole did not develop and implement a written public education program that follows\nthe guidance provided in API RP1162 nor to reach all areas where Seminole transports\nhazardous liquid.\nSeminole's Public Education procedures, in Section VII (J) of its HLOMEM, are general\nand address public radio service announcements in densely populated areas and using the\nTennessee One Call PIPE (Partners in Protecting Everyone) to meet with public officials.\nSeminole's procedure did not\n− have an adequate process to determine the Stakeholder Audiences for the public\neducation program per API RP 1162, Section 3 Stakeholder Audiences,\n− have provisions for including a wider coverage area in the program as Seminole\ntransports a highly volatile liquid,\n− adequately address the message content, or address the program frequency for the\nvarious stakeholder audiences, per API RP 1162, Section 4 Message Content,\n− adequately address how the messages are delivered per API RP 1162, Section 5\nMessage Delivery Methods and/or Media,\n− adequately address how Seminole would consider supplemental enhancements to the\nmessages per API RP 1162, Section 6 Recommendations for Supplemental\nEnhancements of Baseline Public Awareness Program; and,\n− address a program evaluation plan per API RP 1162, Section 8 Program Evaluation, in\nwhich Seminole did not establish\n2\n\n\n\n− a pre-test effectiveness review of its program materials for the stakeholder\naudiences,\n− an annual assessment of the implementation of the program, and\n− an evaluation of the effectiveness of the program implementation, to be\ncompleted at least every four years.\n4. §195.505 Qualifications program.\nEach operator shall have and follow a written qualification program. The program\nshall include provisions to:\n(a) Identify covered tasks;\nSeminole did not explicitly identify covered tasks for hazardous liquids pipeline\noperations in its Operator Qualification Plan (OQP).\nSeminole's OQP is used for both natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline operations but\nthe OQP is primarily written for 49 CFR 192, a natural gas pipeline safety regulation.\nThat is, while the OQP addressed 49 CFR 192 requirements throughout the plan and the\ncovered task analysis addressed covered tasks for complying with 49 CFR 192, the OQP\nonly addressed 49 CFR 195 for hazardous liquid pipeline operations in the Task\nIdentification and Analysis and List of Covered Tasks sections.\nUnder 49 United States Code, §60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$200,000 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for a\nrelated series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents\ninvolved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or\npenalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the items identified in\nthis letter. Failure to do so will result in Seminole Gas Company being subject to additional\nenforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer\nto CPF 2-2013-6005W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this\nenforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any\nportion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b),\nalong with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document\nwith the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of\nwhy you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C.\n552(b).\nSincerely,\nWayne T. Lemoi\nDirector, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPHMSA Southern Region\n3","truncated":false,"body_characters":7549}