{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320135001","title":"BUCKEYE PARTNERS, LP — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2013-01-08","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.420(b), 195.569.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320135001.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320135001.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320135001","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320135001","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving BUCKEYE PARTNERS, LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.420(b),  195.569. The case was opened on 2013-01-08 and is reported as closed as of 2013-06-17. Proposed civil penalty: $47,800. Assessed civil penalty: $47,800. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320135001_Final Order_06172013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320135001/320135001_Final%20Order_06172013.pdf\n\n320135001_Final Order_06172013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320135001/320135001_Final%20Order_06172013_text.pdf\n\n320135001_NOPV PCP_01082013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320135001/320135001_NOPV%20PCP_01082013.pdf\n\n320135001_NOPV PCP_01082013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320135001/320135001_NOPV%20PCP_01082013_text.pdf\n\n320135001_Operator Response to Notice_02042013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320135001/320135001_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_02042013.pdf\n\n320135001_Final Order_06172013_text.pdf\n\nJUNE 17, 2013\nMr. Clark Smith\nPresident & Chief Executive Officer\nBuckeye Partners, LP\nOne Greenway Plaza\nSuite 600\nHouston, TX 77046\nRe: CPF No. 3-2013-5001\nDear Mr. Smith:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $47,800. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment of\nthe full penalty amount, by wire transfer, dated February 5, 2013. This enforcement action is\nnow closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of\nmailing, or 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. Thomas S. (Scott) Collier, Director, Performance Assurance, Buckeye Partners, LP,\nFive TEK Park, 9999 Hamilton Boulevard, Breinigsville, PA 18031\nMr. Dave Barrett, Central Region Director, OPS\nMr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [INSERT RECEIPT NO.]\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)\nBuckeye Partners, LP, ) CPF No. 3-2013-5001\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn April 12-15 and June 13-17, 20111, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Buckeye\nLP (Buckeye or Respondent) in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Indiana. Buckeye’s 560-mile Norco\nPipeline transports petroleum products in 6, 8, and 12-inch diameter pipelines across Illinois,\nIndiana, and Ohio.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated January 8, 2013, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty\n(Notice), which also included a warning pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Buckeye violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420 and\nproposed assessing a civil penalty of $47,800 for the alleged violation. The warning item\nrequired no further action, but warned the operator to correct the probable violation.\nBuckeye responded to the Notice by letter dated January 4, 2013 (Response). The company did\nnot contest the allegation of violation and paid the proposed civil penalty of $47,800, as provided\nin 49 C.F.R. § 190.227. Payment of the penalty serves to close the case with prejudice to\nRespondent.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Buckeye did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated\n49 C.F.R. Part 195, as follows:\n1 The Notice incorrectly states that an inspection occurred during the period May 13-17, 2011. The correct\ninspection period is June 13-17, 2011, which is listed on the Violation Report. Pipeline Safety Violation Report\n(Violation Report) (April 17, 2012) (on file with PHMSA), at 1.\n\n\n\n2\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b), which states:\n§ 195.420 Valve Maintenance.\n(a) . . .\n(b) Each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 7 ½ months, but at\nleast twice each calendar year, inspect each mainline valve to determine\nthat it is functioning properly.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) by failing to inspect each\nmainline valve to determine that it is functioning properly, at an interval not exceeding\n7 ½ months, but at least twice each calendar year. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Buckeye\nfailed to inspect three mainline valves near the East Chicago Junction within the 7 ½ month\ninterval required by the regulation.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation.\nAccordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated\n49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) by failing to inspect each mainline valve, at an interval not exceeding\n7 ½ months and at least twice each calendar year.\nThis finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken against Respondent.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. In determining the amount of a civil penalty under\n49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; the Respondent’s\nability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing\nbusiness; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without\nany reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $47,800 for the violation cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $47,800 for Respondent’s violation of\n49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b), for failing to inspect each mainline valve to determine that it is\nfunctioning properly, at an interval not exceeding 7 ½ months, but at least twice each calendar\nyear. Buckeye neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument\njustifying elimination of the proposed penalty. As this item constitutes a repeat violation2 of the\n2 Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty (Notice), at 2. The items repeated were cited in separate\nenforcement actions, CPF 3-2008-5004 (Item 2) and CPF 1-2011-5002 (Item 2).\n\n\n\n3\nsame regulatory requirement in two additional enforcement actions, it is appropriate that the\npenalty assessment in this case reflect the repeated nature of this kind of violation on\nRespondent’s pipelines. By regularly assessing mainline valves, operators can reduce the risks\nof malfunction and prevent accidents. While Buckeye was aware of the regulatory requirement,\nthe Respondent exceeded the inspection interval on three separate occasions. When the history\nof repeat violations is considered along with the violation in this enforcement action, the\nproposed civil penalty becomes appropriate in this context. Accordingly, having reviewed the\nrecord and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $ 47,800 for\nviolation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b).\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for the Item cited\nabove, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $47,800.\nWARNING ITEM\nWith respect to Item 2, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 195 but did not propose a\ncivil penalty or compliance order for this item. Therefore, this is considered to be a warning\nitem. The warning was for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.569 (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to examine an\nexposed portion of pipeline for evidence of external corrosion if the pipe is bare\nor the coating is deteriorated.\nBuckeye presented information in its Response showing that it has taken certain actions to\naddress the cited item. If OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection,\nRespondent may be subject to future enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":8997}