TE PRODUCTS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

case documentOfficial PDFCPF No 3-2004-5027 Texas Eastern Petroleum Products Company.pdf#

320045027_Final Order_01032006.pdf, page 1Official PDF@ U.S. Deporhenl of Tronsporlotion Plpeline ono Hozqrdour tyloterlols Sqtely Admlnklrotlon 400 Sevenlh Streel, S.w. Washington, D.C. 20590 JAN -3 M6 Mr. Leonard Mallett Vice President of Operations Texas Eastern Petroleum products Company 2929 AllenParkway Houston. TX 11252-2521 Re: CPF No.3-2004-5027 Dear Mr. Mallett: Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of violation and assesses a civil penalty of $3,600. The Order also hnds that you have addressed the inadequacies in your procedures that were cited in the Notice of Amendment. When the civil penalty is paid, this enforcement action will be closed. The penalty payment terms are set forth in the Final Order. Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. g 190.5. Sincerely, J"^^ l{''^-- James Reynolds Pipeline Compliance Registry Offrce of Pioeline Safety Enclosure Mr. Ivan Huntoon Director, Central Region, OPS CERTIFIED MAIL - RI,TURN RECEIPT REOUESTED#

320045027_Final Order_01032006.pdf, page 2oDEPARTMENT OF' TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAF'ETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON. D.C. 20590 In the Matter of Texas Eastern Petroleum Products Company, Respondent. CPF No. 3-2004-5027 FINAL ORDER On April 12-30,2004, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. S 601 17, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of Respondent's facilities and records in Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. As a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, PHMSA, issued to Respondent, by letter dated August 21 ,2004, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Notice of Amendment ('Jotice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. S 190.207,the Notice proposed finding that Respondent had committed violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $3,600 for the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed, in accordance with 49 C.F.R. S 190.237, that Respondent amend its procedures for operations, maintenance and emergencies. Respondent responded to the Notice by letter dated Decemb er 21, 2004 (Response). Respondent did not contest the allegations of violation, but provided information conceming the corrective actions it has taken with respect to the inadequacies in its procedures that were identified in Item I of the Notice. Respondent did not request a hearing, and therefore has waived its right to one. FINDING OF VIOLATION In its Response, Respondent did not contest the alleged violations in the Notice. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated the following section of 49 c.F.R. Part 195, as more fully described in the Notice: 49 C.F.R. S 195.420(b) (Notice Item 2) - failing to inspect and test the nine specified mainline valves on the P-35 line during the April 2003 maintenance. This finding ofviolation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action taken against Respondent.#

320045027_Final Order_01032006.pdf, page 3ASSESSMENT OF'PENALTY Under 49 U.S.C. S 60l22,Respondent is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $ 100,000 per violation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any related series of violations. 49 U.S.C. S 60122 and 49 C.F.R. S 1g0.225 require that, in determining the amount of the civil penalty, I consider the following criteria: nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation, degree of Respondent's culpability, history of Respondent's prior offenses, Respondenfs ability to pay the penalty, good faith by Respondent in attempting to achieve compliance, the effect on Respondent's ability to continue in business, and such other matters as justice may require, With respect to Item 2, the Notice proposed a civil penalty of $3,600 for failing to inspect and test the nine specified mainline valves on the P-35 line during the April 2003 maintenance. Pipeline operators are required to inspect and test each mainline valve at least twice each calendar year at an interval not to exceed 7 ll2 months. Timely inspection and testing of mainline valves is an important part of pipeline safety because their proper operation can be critical in responding to failure incidents and mitigating releases that could threaten the public, property, or the environment. Respondent has presented no information that would warrant a reduction in the civil penalty amount proposed in the Notice for this violation. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $3,600 for violating 49 C.F.R. $ 195.420(b). Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Payment may be made by sending a certified check or money order (containing the CPF Number for this case) payable to "U.S. Department of Transportation" to the Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Financial Operations Division (AMZ-120), P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125. Federal regulations (49 C.F.R. S 89.21 (bX3)) also permit this payment to be made by wire transfer, through the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S. Treasury. Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire transfers should be directed to: Financial Operations Division (AMZ-120), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125; (40s)9s4-4719. Failure to pay the $3,600 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate inaccordancewith31U.S.C.E3717,3lC.F.R.S901.9and49C.F.R.S89.23. Pursuantto those same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if payment is not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty may result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a United States District Court.#

320045027_Final Order_01032006.pdf, page 4AMENDMENT OF PROCEDURES The Notice alleged inadequacies in Respondent's procedures for operations, maintenance and emergencies and proposed to require amendment of Respondent's procedures to comply with the requirements of 49 C.F.R. Part 195. In its response, Respondent submitted copies of its amended procedures, which the Director, Central Region, PHMSA reviewed. Based on the results of this review, I find that Respondent's original procedures as described in the Notice were inadequate to ensure safe operation ofits pipeline system, but that Respondent has corrected the identified inadequacies. Accordingly, it is unnecessary to issue an order directing amendment. WARNING ITEM The Notice did not propose a civil penalty or compliance order for Item 3 in the Notice. Therefore, this is considered to be a warning item. The waming was for Respondent's failure to inspect and test three thermal relief valves at the Lick Creek Station in accordance with $ 195.428(a). Respondent is warned that if this item is not addressed, enforcement action will be taken if a subsequent inspection reveals a violation. Under 49 C.F.R. S 190.215, Respondent has a right to submit a petition for reconsideration of this Final Order. Should Respondent elect to do so, the petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent's receipt of this Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The hling of a petition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. However if Respondent submits payment for the civil penalty, the Final Order becomes the final administrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is waived. The terms and conditions ofthis Final Order are effective on receipt. JAil -3 M6 Date Issued b,"'(l#