# SUPERIOR REFINING COMPANY LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 320045017
- **title:** SUPERIOR REFINING COMPANY LLC — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2004-07-16
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(c)(3), 195.403(b)(1), 195.404(a), 195.404(c)(3), 195.416(a), 195.416(j), 195.418(a).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320045017.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320045017.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320045017
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320045017
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving SUPERIOR REFINING COMPANY LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(c)(3),  195.403(b)(1),  195.404(a),  195.404(c)(3),  195.416(a),  195.416(j),  195.418(a). The case was opened on 2004-07-16 and is reported as closed as of 2007-10-22. Proposed civil penalty: $9,000. Assessed civil penalty: $9,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

320045017_Final Order_10222007.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320045017/320045017_Final%20Order_10222007.pdf

320045017_final order_10222007_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320045017/320045017_final%20order_10222007_text.pdf

320045017_final order_10222007_text.pdf

U S Department
of Trgnsportatton
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety
Administration OCT 2 2 2OOS
1200 New Jersey Ave S E
Washington DC 20590
Mr. W. M. Hulse
President
Murphy Oil USA, Inc.
200 Peach Street
El Dorado, AR 71730
Re: CPF No. 3-2004-5017
Dear Mr. Hulse:
Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in
the above-referenced case. It makes findings of violation and assesses a civil penalty of $9, 000.
I acknowledge receipt of your wire transfer of $9, 000 on August 13, 2004, and accept it as
payment in full of the civil penalty assessed herein The Final Order also finds that you have
completed the actions specified in the Notice required to comply with the pipeline safety
regulations and that you have addressed the inadequacies in your procedures that were cited in
the Notice of Amendment. Therefore, this case is now closed. Your receipt of the Final Order
constitutes service of that document under 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 5.
Sincerely,
James Reynolds
Pipeline Compliance Registry
cc: Ivan Huntoon
Director, Central Region, PHMSA
Enclosure
CERTIFIED MAIL — RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
In the Matter of
Murphy Oil USA, Inc.
,
Respondent
CPF No. 3-2004-5017
FINAL ORDER
On July 16, 2004, in accordance with 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 207, the Director, Central Region, Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), issued to Respondent a Notice of
Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice) following
an onsite inspection of Respondent's facilities and records in Superior, Wisconsin. The Notice
proposed finding that Respondent committed violations of 49 C. F. R. Part 195, assessing a civil
penalty of $9, 000 for the alleged violations, and ordering Respondent to take certain measures to
correct the alleged violations. The Notice also alleged certain inadequacies in Respondent's
operating and maintenance procedures and proposed, in accordance with 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 237,
that they be revised, The Notice further warned that Respondent had committed certain probable
violations of 49 C. F. R. Part 195 and advised Respondent to take appropriate corrective action,
Respondent responded to the Notice by letter dated August 12, 2004. Respondent did not contest
the allegations in the Notice and submitted a wire transfer in the amount of the proposed civil
penalty ($9, 000), thereby waiving further rights to respond and authorizing the entry of this Final
Order. Respondent also provided information concerning the corrective measures it had taken
and submitted copies of its amended procedures.
Pursuant to 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 213 and 49 U. S. C. $ 60122, I hereby find that Respondent violated
the following sections of 49 C. F. R. Part 195, as more fully described in the Notice:



Item 2. The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F, R. ) 195. 403(b)(1),
which states:
g 195. 403. Emergency response training.
(a)""
(b) At intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at
least once each calendar year, each operator shall:
(1) Review with personnel their performance in meeting
the objectives of the training program set forth in
'
paragraph (a) of this section;. . . .
Specifically, Item 2 alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. $ 195. 403(b)(1) by failing to
review with personnel their performance in meeting the objectives of the training program. I
find that Respondent did not review with employees their annual performance nor did records
exist to show how the employees would have met the objectives of their assigned tasks and
Respondent's operating and maintenance procedures.
Item 3. The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. ) 195. 404(a), which states:
g 195. 404. Maps and records.
(a) Each operator shall maintain current maps and records of
its pipeline systems that include at least the following information:
(3) The maximum operating pressure of each pipeline;
(4) The diameter, grade, type and nominal wall thickness of all pipe.
Specifically, Item 3 of the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F. R, $195. 404(a) by
failing to maintain maps and records that included information regarding the maximum operating
pressure (MOP) of each pipeline and its diameter, grade, type, and nominal wall thickness. I find
that Respondent did not have records to support how the MOP for each segment of the system
was established, nor did it have pipe and component data, calculations, and test record
information to support the stated MOP for each of the 6-inch, 8-inch, and 10-inch nominal
diameter pipeline segments and their associated components.
Item 6. The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F, R, $ 195. 416(j), which states:
$195. 416. External corrosion control.
(a)
(j) For aboveground breakout tanks where corrosion
The violations date to the 2001 inspection and refer to the regulations in effect at that time.



of the tank bottom is controlled by a cathodic protection system, the cathodic
protection system must be inspected to ensure it is operated and maintained in
accordance with API Recommended Practice 651, unless the operator notes in the
procedure manual ($ 195. 402(c)) why compliance with all or certain provisions of
API Recommended Practice 651 is not necessary for the safety of a particular
breakout tank.
Specifically, Item 6 of the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C F. R. ) 195. 416(j) by
failing to inspect and monitor the cathodic protection for an aboveground breakout tank where
the tank bottom was cathodically protected. I find that Respondent did not inspect and monitor
the cathodic protection for Tank 25 during the three calendar years preceding the PHMSA
inspection.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent. Having reviewed the record and considered the assessment
criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $9, 000, which amount has already been paid by
Respondent.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
With respect to Item 3, the Notice proposed a compliance order for Respondent's failure to
maintain records to support how the MOP for each segment of the system was established.
Under 49 U, S. C. $ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids
or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety
standards established under chapter 601. The Director, Central Region, PHMSA has indicated
that Respondent has provided information confirming the MOP for each pipeline segment and
has established records identifying information related to the pipe and component specifications
and pressure test records. Since compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation, it is
mnecessary to include compliance terms in this Order.
AMENDMENT OF PROCEDURES
With respect to Item 1, the Notice alleged inadequacies in Respondent's operating and
maintenance procedures and proposed to require amendment of Respondent's procedures to
comply with the requirements of Part 195. In its response, Respondent submitted copies of its
amended procedures, which the Director, Central Region, OPS has reviewed. The Director has
determined that Respondent has amended its procedures for maintenance and normal operations
to provide better clarity and direction to employees. Based on the results of this review, I find
that Respondent's original procedures, as described in the Notice, were inadequate, but that
Respondent has corrected the identified inadequacies. Therefore, no need exists to issue an order
directing amendment.



WARNING ITEMS
With respect to Items 4, 5 and 7, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195 but did not
propose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered to
be warning items. The warnings were as follows:
Item 4. 49 C. F, R. $ 195. 404(c)(3) — failure to maintain records of each required
inspection for the applicable period. The Notice alleged that Respondent did not
have records of annual inspections of the overfill protection systems for tanks 21,
22, 23, and 25 for the 2000-2001 period;
Item 5. 49 C. F. R. $ 195. 416(a) — failure to conduct annual cathodic protection
testing. The Notice alleged that Respondent did not have records demonstrating
the adequacy of cathodic protection for the specified area along the heavy oil
pipeline during the three calendar years preceding the PHMSA inspection; and
Item 7. 49 C. F. R. ) 195. 418(a) — failure to investigate the potential corrosive
effect of hazardous liquids transported. The Notice alleged that Respondent did
not have records supporting the establishment of an internal corrosion control
program that included analysis and control of the potential corrosive effects of the
three types of oil being transported.
Respondent presented information in its Response showing that it had initiated certain actions to
address the cited items. Having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49 C, F. R. $
190. 205, that probable violations of 49 C. F. R. $ 195, 404(c)(3) (Notice Item 4), 49 C. F. R. $
195. 416(a) (Notice Item 5), and 49 C. F. R. 195. 418(a) (Notice Item 6) have occurred and
Respondent is hereby advised to correct such conditions. In the event that OPS finds a violation
for any of these items in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to future
enforcement action.
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt.
OCT 2 2 2007
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Date Issued
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 10491