{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320055006","title":"TESORO HIGH PLAINS PIPELINE COMPANY LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2005-01-20","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(a), 195.440, 195.442(a), 195.442(b), 195.589(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320055006.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320055006.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320055006","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320055006","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving TESORO HIGH PLAINS PIPELINE COMPANY LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195,  195.402(a),  195.440,  195.442(a),  195.442(b),  195.589(c). The case was opened on 2005-01-20 and is reported as closed as of 2006-03-30. Proposed civil penalty: $15,000. Assessed civil penalty: $15,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320055006_Final Order_01112006.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320055006/320055006_Final%20Order_01112006.pdf\n\n320055006_final order_01112006_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320055006/320055006_final%20order_01112006_text.pdf\n\nCPF No 3-2005-5006 Tesoro High Plains Pipeline Company.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320055006/CPF%20No%203-2005-5006%20Tesoro%20High%20Plains%20Pipeline%20Company.pdf\n\n320055006_final order_01112006_text.pdf\n\nU 5 Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration\n400 Seventh Street, S W\nWeehtngton, O C 20590\nJAN 1 l 2X6\nMr John W Moore\nVice President, Pipehnes and Terminals\nTesoro High Plains Pipeline Company\n1225 17th Street, Suite 1800\nDenver, CO 80202\nRe CPF No 3-2005-5006\nDear Mr Moore\nEnclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipehne Safety m\nthe above-referenced case It makes finchngs of violation and assesses a civil penalty of\n$15, 000 The penalty payment terms are set forth in the Final Order This enforcement action\ncloses automatically upon payment Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that\ndocument under 49 C F R tr 190 5\nSincerely\nJames Reynolds\nPipeline Compltance Regtsny\nOffice of Pipehne Safety\nEnclosure\ncc Mr 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\nTesoro High Plains\nPipeline Company,\nRespondent.\nCPF No. 3-2005-5006\nFINAL ORDER\nOn July 19-23 and August 23-27, 2004, pursuant to 49 U S C 5 60117, a representative of the\nPipehne and Hazardous Materials Safety Admimstration (PHMSA) conducted an on-site pipehne\nsafety inspection of Respondent's facilities and records in North Dakota As a result of the\ninspection, the Director, Central Region, PHMSA, issued to Respondent, by letter dated January\n20, 2005, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civd Penalty (Notice) In accordance\nwith 49 C F R 5 190 207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent had committed violations\nof 49 C F R Part 195 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $15, 000 for the alleged\nviolations\nRespondent responded to the Notice by letter dated February 17, 2005 (Response) Respondent\ncontested the allegations, offered information to explain the allegations, provided information\nconcerning the corrective actions it has taken, and requested that the proposed civd penalty be\nreduced or ehminated\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nItem 2 in the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C F R ts 195 440 by failing to\ndemonstrate that a continuing pubhc education program to enable those who could be affected by\nits pipehne to recogiuze and report pipeline emergencies was ongoing dunng calendar years 2002\nand 2003 Section 195 440 reqmres pipeline operators to address their pubhc education\nprograms to the pubhc, government organizations, and fire, police, or other appropnate local\nofficials hi its response, Respondent explained that it was the \"relatively\" new owner of the\nsystem, which it acquired in late 2001, but acknowledged that it failed to conduct any mailings to\nthe pubhc untd 2004 Respondent also failed to demonstrate that its program was presented to\nany government organizations or pubhc officials dunng the relevant time period Accordingly, I\nfind that Respondent violated lt 195 440 by failing to demonstrate that a continuing public\n\n\n\neducation program to enable those who could be affected by its pipehne to recognize and report\npipehne emergencies was ongoing dunng the relevant time period\nItem 3(a) m the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C F R 5 195 442(c)(1) by faihng to\ndemonstrate that dunng calendar years 2002 and 2003 it maintained an up-to-date hst identifying\nall persons who normally engage in excavation activities along its pipeline for the purpose of\nproviding regular notification to such persons of its damage prevention program In its response,\nRespondent explained that it had initiated actions to identify excavators in connection with the\ndevelopment of its overall public education program in late 2003, but acknowledged that it was\nnot in place until 2004 Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 5 195 442(c)(1) by failing\nto fiuhng to demonstrate that dunng the relevant time penod it miuntained an up-to-date hst\nidentifying all persons who normally engage in excavation activities along its pipehne\nItem 3(b) in the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C F R 5 195 442(c)(2) by fatling to\ndemonstrate that it provided notification of its damage prevention program to the pubhc in the\nvicinity of its pipeline or to persons who engage in excavation activities along its pipehne dunng\ncalendar years 2002 and 2003 Section 195 442(c)(2) requires such nonce to be provided to such\npersons as often as needed to make them aware of the damage prevention program In its\nresponse, Respondent acknowledged that it did not implement a damage prevention notification\nprogram until 2004 Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 5 195 442(c)(2) by failing to\ndemonstrate that dunng the relevant time penod it provided notification of its damage prevention\nprogram to the public in the vicmity of its pipehne or to persons who engage in excavation\nactivities along its pipehne\nThese findmgs of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U S C 5 60122, Respondent is sub)ect to a civil penalty not to exceed $100, 000 per\nviolation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of $1, 000, 000 for any related senes of\nviol atloils\n49 U S C 5 60122 and 49 C F R 5 190 225 require that, in determining the amount of the civil\npenalty, I consider the following cntena nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,\ndegree of Respondent's culpability, history of Respondent's pnor offenses, Respondent's abdity to\npay the penalty, good faith by Respondent m attempting to achieve compliance, the effect on\nRespondent's abihty to continue in business, and such other matters as lusttce may require\nWith respect to Item 2, the Notice proposed a civil penalty of $5, 000 for Respondent's failure to\ndemonstrate that a continuing pubhc education program to enable those who could be affected by\nits pipeline to recognize and report pipeline emergencies was ongoing during the relevant time\nperiod Developing and implementing an effective pubhc education program is an important part\nof operating a pipehne safely Stakeholders need to know how to recognize pipehne location\n\n\n\nmarkers and what kinds of precautions they should take, what kinds of properties the commodity\nbeing transported has, and how to recognize and respond to a pipeline emergency In its response\nto this item, Respondent contends that the change in ownership to some extent)ustified the delay\nIn our view, however, it is actually more important after a change in ownership that pubhc\neducation contacts are made in a tunely manner In the event of a pipeline emergency, the public\nand government officials must be able to reach the correct current operator of the system\nimmediately and not waste time attempting to contact the former operator whde harm to the\npubhc, property, or the environment may be occumng Respondent has presented no information\nthat would warrant a reduction in the civil penalty amount proposed in the Notice for this\nviolation Accordingly, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $5, 000 for violating 49 C F R\n$ 195 440\nWith respect to Item 3(a), the Notice proposed a civil penalty of $5, 000 foi Respondent's failure\nto demonstrate that during the relevant time penod it maintained an up-to-date hst identifying all\npersons who normally engage in excavation activities along its pipeline Preventing damage to\npipehnes caused by excavation activity is an important part of operating a pipeline safely\nMatntatmng the list of excavators in a current and up-to-date manner is an important part of\ndetermining whether a pipehne operator is effectively communicating with excavators In\nresponse to this item, Respondent again contends that the change in ownership to some extent\n)ustified the delay As with pubhc education programs, however, it is actually more important\nafter a change in ownership that excavator contacts are made in a timely manner Respondent\nhas presented no information that would warrant a reduction in the civil penalty amount proposed\nin the Notice for this violation Accordingly, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $5, 000 for\nviolating 49 C F R $ 195 442(c)(1)\nWith respect to Item 3(b), the Notice proposed a civil penalty of $5, 000 for Respondent's failure\nto demonstrate that during the relevant time penod it provided notification of its damage\nprevention program to the pubhc in the vicinity of its pipehne or to persons who engage in\nexcavation activities along its pipehne Excavators obviously need to be made aware of the\nexistence of pipehnes in their area and how to utilize one-call damage prevention programs\nMoreover, excavators need to know who the current operator is and how to contact them if the\npipehne is damaged at any time during excavation activities Respondent has presented no\ninformation that would warrant a reduction in the civil penalty amount proposea in the Nonce for\nthis violation Accordingly, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $5, 000 for violating 49 C F R\ng 195 442(c)(2)\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment cntena, I assess\nRespondent a total civil penalty of $15, 000\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service Federal regulations\n(49 C F R 5 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 Detiuled\ninstructions are contained in the enclosure Questions concerning wire transfers should be\ndirected to Financial Operations Division (AMZ-120), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike\n\n\n\nMonroney Aeronautical Center, P 0 Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, (405) 954-4719\nFailure to pay the $15, 000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate\ninaccordance wtth31 US C 53717, 31 C FR 5901 9 and 49 C FR 58923 Pursuant to\nthose same authonties, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if\npayment is not made witlun 110 days of service Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty\nmay result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action m a Uiuted\nStates Distnct Court\nWARNING ITEMS\nThe Notice did not propose a civil penalty or comphance order for Notice Items I or 4\nTherefore, these are considered to be warnmg items The wanungs were for Respondent's failure\nto demonstrate that an annual review of its procedures for operations, maintenance and\nemergencies was conducted during calendar year 2003 in accordance with ) 195 402(a), and\nfadure to maintain records of atmospheric corrosion evaluations in accordance with $ 195 589(c)\nRespondent presented information its response showing that it has initiated actions to address\nthese items Respondent is warned that if these items are not fully addressed, enforcement action\nwill be taken if a subsequent inspection reveals a violation\nUnder 49 C F R 5 190 215, 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 wrttun 20 days\nof Respondent's receipt of this Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s)\nThe filing of a petition automatically stays the payment of any civd 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 waived The terms and\nconditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt\nJAN !! 48\nDate Issued\nS y erard\nAs iate Administrator\nfor ipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":12602}