{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 220145002","title":"MARATHON PIPE LINE LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2014-04-16","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.401, 195.402, 195.406.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220145002.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220145002.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-220145002","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/220145002","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving MARATHON PIPE LINE LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.401,  195.402,  195.406. The case was opened on 2014-04-16 and is reported as closed as of 2014-09-08. Proposed civil penalty: $30,200. Assessed civil penalty: $30,200. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n220145002_Final Order_09082014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220145002/220145002_Final%20Order_09082014.pdf\n\n220145002_Final Order_09082014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220145002/220145002_Final%20Order_09082014_text.pdf\n\n220145002_NOPV PCP_04162014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220145002/220145002_NOPV%20PCP_04162014.pdf\n\n220145002_NOPV PCP_04162014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220145002/220145002_NOPV%20PCP_04162014_text.pdf\n\n220145002_Operator Response to Notice_05192014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/220145002/220145002_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_05192014.pdf\n\n220145002_Final Order_09082014_text.pdf\n\nSEPTEMBER 8, 2014\nMr. Craig O. Pierson\nPresident\nMarathon Pipe Line, LLC\n539 South Main Street\nFindlay, OH 45840\nRe: CPF No. 2-2014-5002\nDear Mr. Pierson:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $30,200. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment of\nthe full penalty amount, by wire transfer, dated May 21, 2014. This enforcement action is now\nclosed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,\nor as otherwise provided 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. Wayne T. Lemoi, Director, Southern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\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)\nMarathon Pipe Line, LLC, ) CPF No. 2-2014-5002\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nDuring June 11 – November 30, 2012 and February 27, 2014, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117,\nrepresentatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),\nSouthern and Central Regions, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), inspected the procedures and\nrecords of Marathon Pipe Line, LLC (Marathon) in Findley, Ohio. Marathon operates\nunderground pipelines and some aboveground storage tanks in the United States. The company's\npipelines transport crude oil; petroleum products, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, and\njet fuel; and natural gas to and from terminals, refineries and other pipelines. Marathon operates\nin Wyoming, Kentucky, Mississippi, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Texas, West Virginia, and\nOhio. The company is headquartered in Findlay, Ohio, and operates as a subsidiary of MPLX\nPipe Line Holdings, LP.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Southern Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated April 16, 2014, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil\nPenalty (Notice), which also included warning items pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In\naccordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Marathon had violated\n49 C.F.R. § 195.401, and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $30,200 for the alleged violation.\nThe warning items required no further action, but warned the operator to correct the probable\nviolations.\nMarathon responded to the Notice by letter dated May 19, 2014 (Response). The company did\nnot contest the allegations of violation and paid the proposed civil penalty of $30,200, as\nprovided in 49 C.F.R. § 190.227. Payment of the penalty will serve to close the case with\nprejudice to Respondent.\n1 Source: http://www.marathonpipeline.com/. (Last accessed August 18, 2014).\n\n\n\n2\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Marathon did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.\nPart 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.401, which states in\nrelevant part:\n§ 195.401 General requirements.\n(a)…\n(b) An operator must make repairs on its pipeline system according to\nthe following requirements:\n(1) Non Integrity management repairs. Whenever an operator\ndiscovers any condition that could adversely affect the safe operation of\nits pipeline system, it must correct the condition within a reasonable time.\nHowever, if the condition is of such a nature that it presents an immediate\nhazard to persons or property, the operator may not operate the affected\npart of the system until it has corrected the unsafe condition.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.401 by failing to make non-\nintegrity repairs on an aboveground breakout tank within a reasonable time after discovering a\ncondition that could adversely affect the safe operation of its pipeline system. Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that on June 8, 2007, Marathon completed an American Petroleum Institute\nStandard 653 (API 653) internal inspection of its aboveground breakout tank #1220 in Lima,\nOhio. The tank inspection was documented in Marathon’s Tank 1220 Evaluation Report dated\nJuly 26, 2007. The report identified areas of settlement exceeding 100 percent of the API 653\nallowable values and recommended replacing the tank’s bottom plates or performing an\nadditional Finite Element Analysis (FEA). API 653 Section 6.9.3.2 also requires an operator to\nreview its inspection findings and recommendations, and to establish a repair scope with\nappropriate timing for repair, monitoring and/or maintenance activities.\nPHMSA inspectors discovered that Marathon had not taken action to address the settlement\nduring their 2012 inspections. Marathon eventually chose to complete an FEA, but the FEA (and\nassociated monitoring plan) on Tank 1220 were not completed until July/August 2012; more\nthan 5 years after Marathon discovered the condition. Respondent did not contest this allegation\nof violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent\nviolated 49 C.F.R. § 195.401 by failing to make non-integrity repairs on an aboveground\nbreakout tank within a reasonable time after discovering a condition that could adversely affect\nthe safe operation of its pipeline system.\nThis finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken against Respondent.\n\n\n\n3\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations.2 In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; and any effect\nthat the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing business; and the good faith of\nRespondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. In addition, I may\nconsider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction because of\nsubsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice proposed a total\ncivil penalty of $30,200 for the violation cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $30,200 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.401, for failing to make non-integrity repairs on an aboveground breakout tank within a\nreasonable time after discovering a condition that could adversely affect the safe operation of its\npipeline system. Marathon did not contest the allegation nor present any evidence or argument\njustifying elimination of the proposed penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and\nconsidered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $30,200 for violation of\n49 C.F.R. § 195.401.\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nItems cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $30,200, which has been paid in\nfull.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 2 and 3, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195 but did not\npropose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered to\nbe warning items. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.402 (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to follow its\nprocedures for energy isolation when performing maintenance at Effingham\nStation on August 23, 2012; and\n49 C.F.R. § 195.406 (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged 110 percent exceedance of\nthe maximum operating pressure (MOP) of its Patoka-Martinsville 20-inch crude\noil pipeline at Effingham Station on August 23, 2012.\n2 The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, Pub. L. No. 112-90, § 2(a)(1), 125 Stat.\n1904, January 3, 2012, increased the civil penalty liability for violating a pipeline safety standard to $200,000 per\nviolation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any related series of violations.\n\n\n\n4\nMarathon presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to\naddress the cited items. If OPS finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection,\nRespondent may be subject to future enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order [CPF No. 2-2014-5002] are effective upon service\nin accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":10009}