ONEOK NGL PIPELINE, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

case documentOfficial PDF320095007_NOPV PCP_06292009.pdf#

case documentOfficial PDF320095007_NOPV PCP_06292009_text.pdf#

320095007_Final Order_11272013_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFNOVEMBER 27, 2013 Mr. Terry K. Spencer President ONEOK NGL Pipeline, LP 100 West 5th Street Tulsa, OK 74103 Re: CPF No. 3-2009-5007 Dear Mr. Spencer: Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of violation and finds that ONEOK NGL Pipeline, LP, has completed the actions specified in the Notice to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. Therefore, this case is now closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Jeffrey D. Wiese Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety Enclosure cc: Ms. Linda Daugherty, Director, Central Region, OPS Mr. Wes Christensen, Senior Vice President, Operations CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED#

320095007_Final Order_11272013_text.pdf, page 2U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 ____________________________________ ) In the Matter of ) ) ONEOK NGL Pipeline, LP, ) CPF No. 3-2009-5007 ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) FINAL ORDER On the dates of April 16-20, 2007, April 23-27, 2007, April 30-May 3, 2007, May 14-18, 2007, June 4-8, 2007, July 10-13, 2007, July 23-26, 2007, and December 17-19, 2007, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of ONEOK NGL Pipeline, LP (ONEOK or Respondent), relating to its Line 5 pipeline construction project near Hutchinson, Kansas, and Argonia, Kansas. ONEOK owns and operates over 2400 miles of natural gas liquid pipelines that transport natural gas from production areas throughout Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas.1 As a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent, by letter dated June 29, 2009, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that ONEOK had violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.561 and ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violation. ONEOK responded to the Notice by letter dated July 31, 2009 (Response). The company did not contest the allegation of violation but provided information concerning the corrective actions it had taken and planned to take. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one. FINDING OF VIOLATION In its Response, ONEOK did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part 195, as follows: 1 ONEOK Partners, LP, available at http://www.oneokpartners.com/Customers/NaturalGasLiquids/Pipelines/NGLPipeline.aspx (last accessed on September 30, 2013).#

320095007_Final Order_11272013_text.pdf, page 32 Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.561(b), which states: § 195.561 When must I inspect pipe coating used for external corrosion control? (a) You must inspect all external pipe coating required by §195.557 just prior to lowering the pipe into the ditch or submerging the pipe. (b) You must repair any coating damage discovered. The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.561(b) by failing to properly repair external coating damage discovered on a section of its pipeline prior to lowering the pipe into a ditch. Specifically, the Notice alleged that ONEOK personnel improperly applied 3M coating repair patch sticks to external coating damage found on a 27.19-mile-long portion of its Line 5 pipeline. During the inspection, PHMSA’s inspector witnessed ONEOK personnel repairing coating by applying heat directly to the 3M patch stick, rather than the parent-coating surface, which was contrary to 3M’s written application instructions. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.561(b) by failing to properly repair external coating damage discovered on a section of its Line 5 pipeline prior to lowering the pipe into a ditch. This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action taken against Respondent. COMPLIANCE ORDER The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item 1 in the Notice for a violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.561(b). 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 indicates that Respondent has taken the following actions to respond to the proposed compliance order: 1. With respect to the violation of § 195.561(b) (Item 1), Respondent assessed the affected section of its pipeline using an inline inspection tool in 2010 and 2012. Respondent also performed a close interval cathodic protection survey and a corrosion growth analysis on the affected pipeline. Respondent has submitted documentation of the results of these actions and the Director has determined that any threat of significant external corrosion appears to have been mitigated at this time. Accordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore, the compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order.#

320095007_Final Order_11272013_text.pdf, page 43 The terms and conditions of this Final Order [CPF No. 3-2009-5007] are effective upon service in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.5. ___________________________________ __________________________ Jeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety#