{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320095026","title":"DCP MIDSTREAM — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2009-12-23","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.304, 195.404(b), 195.410(a), 195.420(b), 195.428(a), 195.440(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320095026.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320095026.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320095026","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320095026","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving DCP MIDSTREAM. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.304,  195.404(b),  195.410(a),  195.420(b),  195.428(a),  195.440(a). The case was opened on 2009-12-23 and is reported as closed as of 2015-08-13. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320095026_ NOPV PCO_12232009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320095026/320095026_%20NOPV%20PCO_12232009_text.pdf\n\n320095026_Closure_08132015.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320095026/320095026_Closure_08132015.pdf\n\n320095026_Closure_08132015_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320095026/320095026_Closure_08132015_text.pdf\n\n320095026_FinalOrder_07262010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320095026/320095026_FinalOrder_07262010.pdf\n\n320095026_FinalOrder_07262010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320095026/320095026_FinalOrder_07262010_text.pdf\n\n320095026_NOPV PCO_12232009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320095026/320095026_NOPV%20PCO_12232009.pdf\n\n320095026_Closure_08132015_text.pdf\n\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nAugust 13, 2015\nMr. Brent Backes\nGeneral Counsel and Vice President\nDCP Midstream\n370 17th Street\nDenver, Colorado 80202\nCPF 3-2009-5026\nDear Mr. Backes:\nOn July 26, 2010, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)\nissued to Marysville Hydrocarbons, LLC, a Final Order in the above-referenced case. In\nthe annual status report dated June 10, 2011, it was indicated that DCP Midstream had\nacquired the Marysville Storage facility and would fulfill the remaining obligations under\nthe Compliance Order. The Compliance Order is part of the Final Order (Order). Based on\nour review of the documentation that was provided by Marysville Hydrocarbon and DCP\nMidstream, it has been determined that you have complied with the terms of this Order.\nAccordingly, this case is now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to\nthe matters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nAllan C. Beshore\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n\n320095026_FinalOrder_07262010_text.pdf\n\nJUL 26 2010\nMr. Manouch Daneshvar\nVice President\nMarysville Hydrocarbons, LLC\n2510 Busha Highway\nMarysville, MI 48040\nRe: CPF No. 3-2009-5026\nDear Mr. Daneshvar:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Marysville Hydrocarbons, LLC, to\ncomply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been\ncompleted, as determined by the Director, Central Region, this enforcement action will be\nclosed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,\nor as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. David Barrett, Director, Central Region, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7005 1160 0001 0039 0713]\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n____________________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nMarysville Hydrocarbons, LLC, ) CPF No. 3-2009-5026\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn April 27-May 1, 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),\nconducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Marysville\nHydrocarbons, LLC (Marysville or Respondent), at its highly volatile liquids terminal in\nMarysville, Michigan.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated December 23, 2009, a Notice of Probable Violation, and Proposed Compliance\nOrder. In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Marysville had\nviolated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.304 and 195.440(a) and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain\nmeasures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed finding that Respondent\nhad committed certain other probable violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and warning the company\nto take appropriate corrective action or be subject to future enforcement action.\nMarysville responded to the Notice by letter dated January 26, 2010 (Response). The company\ndid not contest the allegations of violation and provided information concerning the corrective\nactions it planned to take. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its\nright to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Marysville did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.\nPart 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.304, which states:\n\n\n\n2\n§ 195.304 Test pressure.\nThe test pressure for each pressure test conducted under this subpart\nmust be maintained throughout the part of the system being tested for at\nleast 4 continuous hours at a pressure equal to 125 percent, or more, of the\nmaximum operating pressure and, in the case of a pipeline that is not\nvisually inspected for leakage during the test, for at least an additional 4\ncontinuous hours at a pressure equal to 110 percent, or more, of the\nmaximum operating pressure.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.304 by failing to perform\ndocumented pressure tests as required. Specifically, the Notice alleged that portions of the\nfacility were pressure tested for only one hour, rather than four or eight continuous hours, and\nthat Respondent did not have proper documentation that included pressure charts.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.304 by failing to perform\ndocumented pressure tests as required.\nItem 6: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(a), which states:\n§ 195.440 Public awareness.\n(a) Each pipeline operator must develop and implement a written\ncontinuing public education program that follows the guidance provided in\nthe American Petroleum Institute’s (API) Recommended Practice (RP)\n1162 (incorporated by reference, see § 195.3).\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(a) by failing to develop a\nwritten continuing public education program that followed the guidance of API RP 1162.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(a) by failing to develop a\nwritten continuing public education program that followed the guidance of API RP 1162.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1 and 6 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.304 and 195.440(a), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a),\neach person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a\npipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under\nchapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.217,\nRespondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety\nregulations applicable to its operations:\n\n\n\n3\n1. With respect to the violation of § 195.304 (Item 1), Respondent must:\n(a) Develop a program and schedule for pressure testing the facility in a manner\nconsistent with § 195.304, and must submit it to the Director, Central Region, for\napproval within 60 days of receipt of this Final Order. The program must include\nprovisions for analysis of any failures, as well as re-evaluation of safe operating\npressures and prioritization of test sections based on the results. Respondent\nmust provide the Director with annual updates on the status of the pressure test\nprogram and must complete the program within five years of the date of this\norder; and\n(b) To maintain safe conditions, Respondent must immediately reset the relief\nvalves and high pressure shutdowns to protect the 1200 psig MOP until the\nfacilities have been pressure tested.\n2. With respect to the violation of § 195.440(a) (Item 6), Respondent must develop a\nwritten continuing public education program that meets the requirements of § 195.440, and must\nsubmit it to the Director, Central Region, for review within 60 days of receipt of this Final Order.\nUnless otherwise instructed by the Director, Central Region, Respondent must then implement\nthe plan as submitted.\n3. Respondent must maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated\nwith fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director, Central Region. Costs\nmust be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of plans,\nprocedures, studies, and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions, and\nother changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an\nextension.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nnot to exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the\nAttorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 2, 3, 4, and 5, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195 but did\nnot propose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered\nto be warning items. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.404(b) (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to maintain daily\noperating records indicating the discharge pressure at each pump station.\nSpecifically, the Notice alleged that from approximately April 2008 to February\n2009, Marysville’s new SCADA system did not record discharge pressures for\npumps located in the company’s storage fields;\n\n\n\n4\n49 C.F.R. § 195.410(a) (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to place the\nproper line markers at one road crossing. Specifically, the Notice alleged that the\nmarkers at a road crossing stated the wrong operator name, product, and telephone\nnumber;\n49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) (Item 4) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to inspect each\nmainline valve at least twice each calendar year, at intervals not exceeding 7 ½\nmonths. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent inspected its mainline\nvalves only once each calendar year and had not classified certain valves as\nmainline valves; and\n49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to inspect its high\npressure shutdown switches and control valves at least twice per calendar year.\nMarysville presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to\naddress the cited items. Accordingly, having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49\nC.F.R. § 190.205, that probable violations of 49 C.F.R. § 195.404(b) (Notice Item 2), 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.410(a) (Notice Item 3), 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) (Notice Item 4), and 49 C.F.R. §\n195.428(a) (Notice Item 5) have occurred and Respondent is hereby advised to correct such\nconditions. In the event that OPS finds a violation of any of these provisions in a subsequent\ninspection, Respondent may be subject to future enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n320095026_ NOPV PCO_12232009_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nDecember 23, 2009\nMr. Manouch Daneshvar\nVice President\nMarysville Hydrocarbons\n30078 Schoenherr, Suite 150\nWarren, MI 48088\nCPF 3-2009-5026\nDear Mr. Daneshvar:\nOn April 27 – May 1, 2009, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code inspected\nMarysville Hydrocarbons’ records and facilities for the highly volatile liquid storage field in\nMarysville, Michigan. The Marysville facilities were recently identified as being subject to\nthe Pipeline Safety Regulations and Marysville Hydrocarbons (Marysville) has been in the\nprocess of transitioning their operations to comply with Part 195.\nAs a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and\nthe probable violation(s) are:\n1. §195.304 Test pressure.\nThe test pressure for each pressure test conducted under this subpart must be\nmaintained throughout the part of the system being tested for at least 4 continuous\nhours at a pressure equal to 125 percent, or more, of the maximum operating\npressure and, in the case of a pipeline that is not visually inspected for leakage\n\n\n\nduring test, for at least an additional 4 continuous hours at a pressure equal to 110\npercent, or more, of the maximum operating pressure.\nReview of Marysville records found that the pressure tests of the facility did not meet the\nrequirements of Part 195. The construction of this facility began in 1972. The records\nindicated that portions of the facility were pressure tested to either 1500 psig or 1800 psig\nfor one hour per ASME B31.3 “Process Piping” (The industry code to which this facility\nwas built in the early 1970’s and to which it was operated since then). Additionally, these\nrecords were simply statements on the alignment sheets. There were no pressure charts or\nother documentation. The maximum operating pressure Marysville claimed to have\nestablished was 1440 psig.\n2. §195.404 Maps and Records.\nb) Each operator shall maintain for at least 3 years daily operating records that\nindicate-\n(1) The discharge pressure at each pump station;\nMarysville did not have records of the discharge pressure for their pumps located in the\nstorage field for several months. Marysville is updating the control center to a new\nSCADA system. However, due to a problem, the new SCADA system did not record the\ndischarge pressures from approximately April 2008 to February 2009. The system has\nbeen corrected, and it has maintained pressure records since that time.\n3. §195.410 Line markers.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator shall place and\nmaintain line markers over each buried pipeline in accordance with the\nfollowing:\n(2) The marker must state at least the following on a background of sharply\ncontrasting color:\n(i) The word \"Warning,\" \"Caution,\" or \"Danger\" followed by the words\n``Petroleum (or the name of the hazardous liquid transported)\nPipeline'', or ``Carbon Dioxide Pipeline,'' all of which, except for\nmarkers in heavily developed urban areas, must be in letters at least 1\ninch (25 millimeters) high with an approximate stroke of \\1/4\\ inch (6.4\nmillimeters).\n(ii) The name of the operator and a telephone number (including area\ncode) where the operator can be reached at all times.\nMarysville did not have the correct line markers at one road crossing. The two lines leave\nthe storage facility and go to the Sun station about a mile away. The line markers at Witt\nRoad were marked with Consumer Pipeline markers. Additionally, the markers did not\nstate the right product, nor was the phone number up to date. Marysville indicated that\n2\n\n\n\nthey were now in the process of changing those line markers out. The next road crossing\ninspection found the updated line markers on the pipelines.\n4. §195.420 Valve maintenance.\n(b) Each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 7 1/2 months, but at least twice\neach calendar year, inspect each mainline valve to determine that it is\nfunctioning properly.\nThe review of records found that the mainline valves were only being inspected once a\nyear. Marysville must classify certain valves as mainline in this facility and should\nensure that they are inspected and documented at a minimum of twice a year.\n5. §195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems\na. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator shall, at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, or in the\ncase of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at intervals not to exceed\n7½ months, but at least twice each calendar year, inspect and test each pressure\nlimiting device, relief valve, pressure regulator, or other item of pressure control\nequipment to determine that it is functioning properly, is in good mechanical\ncondition, and is adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of\noperation for the service in which it is used.\nReview of records found that the high pressure shutdown switches and control valves\nwere not being inspected twice a year. The thermal reliefs were placed on a six month\nschedule in 2008. This was done in conjunction with the transition from adherence to the\nASME B31.3 Code to compliance with Part 195.\n6. §195.440 Public awareness\n(a) Each pipeline operator must develop and implement a written continuing public\neducation program that follows the guidance provided in the American\nPetroleum Institute's (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 1162 (IBR, see §\n195.3).\nAt the time of the PHMSA inspection, Marysville Hydrocarbon did not have a completed\nwritten public awareness program that followed the guidance of API RP 1162. Prior to\n2008, Marysville did not consider themselves a jurisdictional operator and did not follow\nPart 195 regulations. In 2008, Marysville began taking steps to comply with Part 195.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to items 1 and 6 pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to\n3\n\n\n\nMarysville Hydrocarbon. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed\nand made a part of this Notice.\nWarning Items\nWith respect to items 2-5, we have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents\ninvolved in this case and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty\nassessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to promptly correct these items. Be\nadvised that failure to do so may result in Marysville Hydrocarbon being subject to additional\nenforcement action.\nResponse to this Notice\nEnclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline\nOperators in Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response\noptions. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is\nsubject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive\nmaterial qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete\noriginal document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you\nbelieve qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the\nredacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not\nrespond within 30 days of receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to\ncontest the allegations in this Notice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline\nSafety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final\nOrder.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 3-2009-5026 and for each\ndocument you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\nSincerely,\nIvan A. Huntoon\nDirector, Central Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nEnclosures: Proposed Compliance Order\nResponse Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings\n4\n\n\n\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nPursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Marysville Hydrocarbon a Compliance Order\nincorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of Marysville\nHydroCarbon with the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. In regard to Item Number 1 of the Notice pertaining to the pressure test of the\nfacility, Marysville must submit a program and schedule to pressure test the\nfacility per 49 CFR Part 195 requirements. The program must include\nprovisions for analysis of any failures and the re-evaluation of safe operating\npressures and prioritization of test sections based on the results.\na. The program and schedule must be submitted within 60 days from the receipt\nof the Final Order to the Director Central Region for approval.\nb. Implement the schedule upon approval from the Director Central Region.\nc. To maintain safety, reset the relief valves and high pressure shut downs to\nprotect the 1200 psig MOP until the facilities are pressure tested.\nd. Provide annual updates on the status of the pressure test program.\n2. The pressure test program must be completed within five years from the date\nthe Final Order is received.\n3. In regard to Item Number 6 of the Notice pertaining to the Public Awareness\nProgram, Marysville must submit the public awareness program per 49CFR\nPart 195.\na. The program must be submitted within 60 days of the receipt of the Final\nOrder to the Director Central Region for review.\nb. Implement the plan as submitted, unless otherwise instructed by the Director,\nCentral Region.\n4. Marysville shall maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to Ivan A.\nHuntoon, Director, Central Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration. Costs shall be reported in two categories: 1) total cost\nassociated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses,\nand 2) total cost associated with replacements and additions.\n5","truncated":false,"body_characters":22490}