MUSTANG PIPE LINE LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

case documentOfficial PDFCPF_3-2005-5013.pdf#

case documentOfficial PDFCPF_NO_3-2005-5013.pdf#

case documentOfficial PDFMobil_Pipeline_Company_CPF_3-2005-5013.pdf#

320055013_final order_07262006_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFo U 5 Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S W Washington D C 20590 JUL 2 8 40'80 Mr Randy Parker Managing Partner Mustang Ptpe Ltne Partners 800 bell Street, Room EMB-6471 Houston, TX 77002 Re CPF No 3-2005-5013 Dear Mr Parker Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipehne Safety in the above-referenced case It makes a finding of violation and assesses a civd penalty of $1, 000 The penalty payment terms are set forth in the Final Order This enforcement action closes automatically upon payment Your receipt of the Ftnal Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C F R I1 '190 5 Sincerely, James Reynolds Pipeline Comphance Registry Office of Ptpeltne Safety Enclosure Cc Ivan A Huntoon Director, Central Region, PHP-300 CERTIFIED MAIL-RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED#

320055013_final order_07262006_text.pdf, page 2DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20590 In the Matter of ) Mustang Pipe Line Partners, ) ) ) ) Respondent ) CPF No. 3-2005-5013 FINAL ORDER On May 11-14, 2004, pursuant to 49 U S C $ 60117, a representative of the Pipehne and Hazardous Matenals Safety Admuustration, Office of Pipehne Safety (OPS) conducted an on- site pipehne safety inspection of an 18-mch pipeline system in Patoka, Ilhnois, and a 30-mch pipehne system in Moneka and Joliet, Illinois As a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS, issued to Mobil Pipe Lme Company (MPLCo), by letter dated March 2, 2005, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civd Penalty (Notice) In accordance with 49 C F R 1'1 190 207, the Notice proposed finding that MPLCo had committed violations of 49 C F R Part 195, snd proposed assessing a civil penalty of $11, 000 for the alleged violations MPLCo responded to the Notice by letter dated March 31, 2005 In its response, MPLCo clanfied that, as operator of the 30-inch line, it was responding to the portions of the Notice relating to that lme, and that Mustang Pipe Line Partners (MPLP), as operator of the 18-inch line, had agreed to respond to the portions of the Notice relatmg to that hne By letter dated March 31, 2005, MPLP responded to the portions of the Notice relating to the 18-inch hne MPLP did not contest Item I in the Notice, but phd contest Item 2 in part FINDING OF VIOLATION Item 2 m the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C F R $ 195 579(b)(3) by fading to examine a corrosion monitonng coupon at the Patoka tank farm at least twice each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 7 I/2 months Specifically, the Notice alleged that the specified corrosion coupon was examined only once in 2002 and only once in 2003 In its response, Respondent acknowledged that it was unable to venfy that the coupon had been examined a second time in 2002 Respondent, however, provided documentation demonstrating that the coupon had been exammed twice in calendar year 2003 Accordingly, I find that Respondent A separate Final Order addressed to MPLCo relatmg to the 30-mch hne will be issued concurrently with this Fmal Order#

320055013_final order_07262006_text.pdf, page 3violated 49 C F R $ 195 579(b)(3) by fading to examine the corrosion monitonng coupon at the Patoka tank farm twice dunng calendar year 2002 This finding of violation will be considered a pnor offense in any subsequent enforcement action taken against Respondent ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY Under 49 U S C ) 60122, Respondent is sub)ect 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 $ 60122 and 49 C F R $ 190 225 require that, in determinmg the amount of the civd penalty, I consider the following cnteria nature, circumstances, and gravity of the vtolanon, degree of Respondent's culpabihty, history of Respondent's pnor offenses, Respondent's abihty to pay the penalty, good faith by Respondent in attempnng to aclueve compliance, the effect on Respondent's abdity to continue in business, and such other matters as 3usnce may require With respect to Item 2, the Notice proposed a civil penalty of $11, 000 for failure to conduct twice yearly exanunations of coupon used to monitor corrosion inlubitors Of this $11, 000, $2, 000 related to MPLP's alleged failure to examine the coupon at the Patoka tank farm a second time dunng 2002 and 2003 As discussed above, Respondent provided evidence that this coupon had been examined a second time in 2003 Therefore, I find that a propornonal reduction in the penalty amount proposed in the Notice as to MPLP is warranted Accordingly, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $1, 000 for violating 49 C F R ( 195 579(b)(3) by fatling to examme the specified coupon at the Patoka tank farm tvnce dunng calendar year 2002 Respondent has the ability to pay this penalty without adversely affecting its abihty to continue in busmess Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service Payment may be made by sendmg a certified check or money order (contaiiung the CPF Number for this case) payable to "U S Department of Transportation" to the Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Fmancial Operations Division (AMZ-300), P 0 Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125 Federal regulations (49 C F R $ 89 21(b)(3)) also permit this payment to be made by wue transfer, through the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U S Treasury Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure Quesnons concenung wue transfers should be directed to Financial Operations Division (AMZ-300), Federal Aviation Adnumstration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, P 0 Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, (405) 954-8893#

320055013_final order_07262006_text.pdf, page 4Fadure to pay the $1, 000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate inaccordance with 31 US C $ 3717, 31 C FR ( 901 9and49C FR $ 8923 Pursuantto those same authorities, a late penalty charge of stx percent (6%) per annum will be charged if payment is not made wtttun 110 days of service Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty may result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropnate action m a Uiuted States District Court WARNING ITEM The Notice did not propose a civd penalty or corrective action for Item 1 in the Notice— Respondent's failure to update its maps with utihty crossing information in accordance with 49 C F R $ 195 404(a)(2) Therefore, this is considered to be a warning item Respondent presented information m its response showing that it has taken action to address the cited item Respondent is warned that if it does not correct this item, enforcement action will be taken if a subsequent inspection reveals a violation Under 49 C F R tJ 190 215, Respondent has a right to submit a peution for reconsideration of tlus 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 bnef statement of the issue(s) The fihng of a petition automaucally stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed However if Respondent submits payment for the civil penalty, the Final Order becomes the final admuustrative decision and the nght to petition for reconsideration is waived The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt JUL 10 200c Date Issued tac s y rard iate Admuustrator Pipehne Safety#

320055013_Final Order_07102006.pdf, page 1Official PDFU.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 JUL !0 Mr. John Y. Dupre Vice President, Manager Northern Operations Mobil Pipeline Company 3225 Gallows Road Room 5B2134 Fairfax, VA 22037 Re: CPF No. 3-2005-5013 Dear Mr. Dupre: Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in the above-referenced case. It withdraws one of the allegations of viollation and gives you a warning with respect to the other. Your receipt of the Final Order corpstitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. 5 190.5. Sincerely, James Reynolds Pipeline Compliance Registry Office of Pipeline Safety Enclosure cc: Ivan A. Huntoon Director, Central Region, PHP-300 CERTIFIED MAIL -RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTED#

320055013_Final Order_07102006.pdf, page 2DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 In the Matter of Mobil Pipe Line Co., ) CPF NO. 3-2005-5013 Respondent ) ) 1 1 1 FINAL ORDER On May 1 1-14,2004, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety (QPS) conducted an on- site pipeline safety inspection of a 30-inch pipeline system in Moneka and Joliet, Illinois, and an 18-inch pipeline system in Patoka, Illinois. As a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS, issued to Mobil Pipe Line Company (MPLCo), by letter dated March 2,2005, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty (Notice). In aacordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that MPLCo had committed viol~tions of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $1 1,000 for the alleged vi~lations. MPLCo responded to the Notice by letter dated March 3 1,2005. In its nesponse, MPLCo clarified that, as operator of the 30-inch line, it was responding to the partions of the Notice relating to that line, and that Mustang Pipe Line Partners (MPLP), as operator of the 18-inch line, had agreed to respond to the portions of the Notice relating to that line.' MPLCo did not contest Item 1 in the Notice, but did contest Item 2 and requested that it be withdrawn. WITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATION Item 2 of the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.579(b)(3) by failing to examine certain corrosion monitoring coupons at the Joliet refinery and the Moneka terminal at least twice each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 7 112 months. Specifically, the Notice alleged that five specified corrosion coupons were examined only once in 2003. In its response, Respondent presented information demonstrating that corrosion inhibitors have never been injected into the 30-inch pipeline system and breakout tanks. Therefore, the specified ' A separate Final Order addressed to MPLP relating to the 18-inch line will be issued concurrently with this Final Order.#

320055013_Final Order_07102006.pdf, page 3coupons are not subject to the requirement for twice yearly examinations. Accordingly, I am withdrawing this allegation. WARNING ITEM The Notice did not propose a civil penalty or corrective action for Item 1 in the Notice- Respondent's failure to update its maps with utility crossing information in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 195.404(a)(2). Therefore, this is considered to be a warning item. Respondent presented information in its response showing that it has taken action to address the cited item. Respondent is warned that if it does not correct this item, enforcement action will be taken if a subsequent inspection reveals a violation. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt. JUL 1 0 Date Issued ~ s w i a t e Administrator for Pipeline Safety#