{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320045010","title":"EXPLORER PIPELINE CO — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2004-04-05","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.401(b), 195.404(b)(1), 195.406(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320045010.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320045010.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320045010","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320045010","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving EXPLORER PIPELINE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195,  195.401(b),  195.404(b)(1),  195.406(b). The case was opened on 2004-04-05 and is reported as closed as of 2007-02-02. Proposed civil penalty: $45,750. Assessed civil penalty: $42,750. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320045010_Final Order_01092007.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320045010/320045010_Final%20Order_01092007.pdf\n\n320045010_final order_01092007_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320045010/320045010_final%20order_01092007_text.pdf\n\nCPF_NO_3-2004-5010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320045010/CPF_NO_3-2004-5010.pdf\n\n320045010_final order_01092007_text.pdf\n\nO\nU 5 Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Admmistration\n400 Seventh Street, S W\nWashington, D C 20590\nMr Ron Sands\nVice President\nExplorer Pipelme Company\n6846 S Canton Avenue, Suite 300\nTulsa, OK 74136\nRe CPF No 3-2004-5010\nDear Mr Sands\nEnclosed is the Final Order issued by the Acting Associate Administrator for Pipehne\nSafety in the above-referenced case It withdraws one of the allegations of violation, makes\nfindings of violation, and assesses a civil penalty of $42, 750 The penalty payment terms are set\nforth in the Final Order This enforcement action closes automatically upon payment Your\nreceipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C F R tJ 190 5\nSincerely,\nJames Reynolds\nPipeline Compliance Registry\nOffice of Pipehne Safety\nEnclosure\ncc Ivan Huntoon\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED\n\n\n\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D, C. 20590\nIn the Matter of )\nExplorer Pipeline Company, )\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\nCPF No. 3-2004-5010\nFINAL ORDER\nOn June 25-29 and July 9-13, 2001, pursuant to 49 U S C IJ 60117, a representative of the\nPipehne and Hazardous Matenals Safety Administration, Office of Pipehne Safety (OPS)\nconducted an on-site pipehne safety inspection of Respondent's facilities and records in the\nGlenpool, Wood River, and Hammond operating areas located in Missouri, Ilhnois, and Indiana\nAs a result of the mspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS, issued to Respondent, by letter\ndated Apnl 5, 2004, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty (Notice) In\naccordance with 49 C F R IJ 190 207, the Notice proposed findmg that Respondent had\ncommitted violations of 49 C F R Part 195, and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $45, 750 for\nthe alleged violations\nRespondent responded to the Notice by letter dated May 7, 2004 (Response) Respondent did not\ncontest two of the allegations of violation (Notice Items I and 3) but provided information\nconcerning the corrective actions it has taken Respondent dtd contest one allegation (Item 2)\nand provided information m support of its position Respondent did not request a hearing, and\ntherefore has waived its right to one\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its response, Respondent did not contest two of the alleged violations in the Notice\nAccordingly, I find that Respondent violated the following sections of 49 C F R Part 195, as\nmore fully described in the Notice\n49 C F R fJ 195 401(b) (Item I) — fathng to correct low pipe-to-soil cathodic protection\nreadings at the specified locations withm a reasonable time,\n49 C F R fJ 195 406(b) (Item 3) — fading to ensure that actual operating pressure did not\nexceed 110 percent of the estabhshed maximum operating pressure at the East St Louis\nStation on tv o specified dates\n\n\n\nThese findings of violation will be considered pnor offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent\nWITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATION\nItem 2 in the Notice alleged that ResPondent had violated 49 C F R IJ 195 404(b)(1) by faihng to\nmaintain dtuly operating records of the discharge pressure at the Decatur Pump Station for the\nmonths of January, November, and December 2000 In its response, Respondent submitted\ninformation demonstrating that it did maintain these records Based on this information\ndemonsuattng comphance with the regulation, I am withdrawing this allegation of violation\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U S C IJ 60122 (2001), Respondent is subJect to a civil penalty not to exceed $25, 000\nper violation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of $500, 000 for any related series of\nviolations i\n49 U S C $ 60122 and 49 C F R IJ 190 225 require that, in determining the amount of the civil\npenalty, I consider the following criteria nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,\ndegree of Respondent's culpabtltty, history of Respondent's pnor offenses, Respondent's ability to\npay the penalty, good fmth by Respondent in attempting to achieve comphance, the effect on\nRespondent's ability to continue in business, and such other matters as Justice may require\nWith respect to Item I, the Notice proposed that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty of $2, 750\nfor violating IJ 195 401(b) by faihng to correct low pipe-to-soil cathodic protection readings at\nthe specified locations withtn a reasonable time The pipehne safety regulations require pipehne\noperators to conduct tests to determine the adequacy of cathodic protection on an annual basis\nand to correct any condition it discovers that could adversely affect the safe operauon of its\npipehne within a reasonable time meanmg, in this case, before the next annual inspection\nIn its response, Respondent brtefly descnbed the corrective measures it had taken after the OPS\ninspection to address the cathodtc protection issues in the specified areas Respondent, however,\npresented no information that would warrant a reductton in the penalty amount proposed in the\nNotice for this item Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment\ncntena, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $2, 750 for this violation\nWith respect to Item 3, the Notice proposed that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty of\n$40, 000 for violatmg II 195 406(b) by faihng to ensure that actual operating pressure did not\nexceed 110 percent of the established maximum operatmg pressure (MOP) at the East St Louis\nThe Pipehne Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (Pub L bio 107-355, 116 Stat 2992) increased the\nmaximum civil penalty hability to $100, 000 per violation for each day of the violation and $1, 000, 000 for any\nrelated senes of violations However because the violations were discovered poor to December 17, 2002, the\neffective date of the Act, Respondent is not sublect to the higher maximums m this case\n\n\n\nStation on two specified dates Preventing pressure surges from exceeding 110 percent of MOP\nis cntical to the safe operation of a pipehne because such surges can adversely impact the\nintegrity of the pipe In this case, the station facility is located near the Mississippi River which\nis a commercially navigable waterway and is considered to be a high consequence area\nIn its response, Respondent indicated that it had taken corrective action including installation of a\npressure rehef system after receiving the Notice (rom OPS We acknowledge that Respondent\nhas now taken measures that will better control the operating pressure and prevent excessive\nsurges Respondent, however, presented no information that would warrant a reduction in the\npenalty amount proposed in the Notice for this item Accordingly, having reviewed the record\nand considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $40, 000 for this\nviolation\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment cnterta, I assess\nRespondent a total civil penalty of $42, 750\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service Federal regulations\n(49 C F R $ 89 21(b)(3)) require this payment be made by wire transfer, through the Federal\nReserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U S Treasury Detailed\ninstructions are contained in the enclosure Questions concermng wire transfers should be\ndirected to Financial Operations Division (AMZ-120), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike\nMonroney Aeronautical Center, P 0 Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, (405) 954-4719\nFailure to pay the $42, 750 civil penalty will result m accrual of interest at the current annual rate\ninaccordance with 31 U S C I'1 3717, 31 C FR I'1 901 9 and49 CF R g 8923 Pursuant to\nthose same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if\npayment is not made within 110 days of service Furthermore, fadure to pay the civil penalty\nmay result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a United\nStates District Court\nWARNING ITEM\nThe Notice did not propose a civil penalty or corrective action for Item I A in the Notice — fadure\nto address items discovered during the annual inspections conducted at the Hammond tank farm\nin 1999 and 2000 Therefore, this is considered to be a warmng item Respondent is warned that\nif it does not take appropriate action to correct this item, enforcement action will be taken if a\nsubsequent inspection reveals a violation\n\n\n\nUnder 49 C F R $ 190 215, Respondent has a right to submit a petition for reconsideration of\nthis Final Order Should Respondent elect to do so, the petition must be received within 20 days\nof Respondent's receipt of this Final Order and must contain a bnef statement of the issue(s)\nThe fihng of a petition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed However if\nRespondent submits payment for the civil penalty, the Final Order becomes the final\nadministrative decision and the nght to petition for reconsideration is wiuved The terms and\nconditions of this Fmal Order are effective on receipt\nhe dore L Wtllke cti Associate Administrator\nfo pehne Safety\nDate Issued","truncated":false,"body_characters":9984}