{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320176013W","title":"CALIBER NORTH DAKOTA LLC — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2017-09-29","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.402(a), 195.403(a), 195.440(c), 195.440(g), 195.507.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320176013w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320176013w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320176013w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320176013W","body":"Warning Letter involving CALIBER NORTH DAKOTA LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(a),  195.403(a),  195.440(c),  195.440(g),  195.507. The case was opened on 2017-09-29 and is reported as closed as of 2017-09-29. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320176013W_Warning Letter_09292017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320176013W/320176013W_Warning%20Letter_09292017.pdf\n\n320176013W_Warning Letter_09292017_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320176013W/320176013W_Warning%20Letter_09292017_text.pdf\n\n320176013W_Warning Letter_09292017_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nSeptember 29, 2017\nMr. David Scobel\nChief Operating Officer\nCaliber North Dakota\n1200 17th Street, Suite 2100\nDenver, Colorado 80202\nCPF 3-2017-6013W\nDear Mr. Scobel:\nOn April 10-12, 2016, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.)\ninspected your Hay Butte pipeline system in Alexander, North Dakota.\nAs a result of the inspection, it is alleged that you have committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The items\ninspected and the probable violations are:\n1. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline system a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance\nactivities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies. This manual shall\nbe reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar\nyear, and appropriate changes made as necessary to insure that the manual is\neffective. This manual shall be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline\nsystem commence, and appropriate parts shall be kept at locations where\noperations and maintenance activities are conducted.\n\n\n\nCaliber North Dakota (Caliber) failed to have a manual of written procedures for\noperating the pump station in the Hay Butte gas plant control room or elsewhere in this\nplant. Caliber’s pipeline facilities located at the Hay Butte gas plant are operated by\ntwo gas plant operators operating out of a gas plant control room. Although Caliber\nmaintained a copy of its O&M procedures in the administrative office, there was no\ncopy in the control room.\n2. §195.403 Emergency Response Training.\n(a) Each operator shall establish and conduct a continuing training program to\ninstruct emergency response personnel to:\n(1) Carry out the emergency procedures established under 195.402 that relate to\ntheir assignments;\n(2) Know the characteristics and hazards of the hazardous liquids or carbon\ndioxide transported, including, in case of flammable HVL, flammability of\nmixtures with air, odorless vapors, and water reactions;\n(3) Recognize conditions that are likely to cause emergencies, predict the\nconsequences of facility malfunctions or failures and hazardous liquids or\ncarbon dioxide spills, and take appropriate corrective action;\n(4) Take steps necessary to control any accidental release of hazardous liquid or\ncarbon dioxide and to minimize the potential for fire, explosion, toxicity, or\nenvironmental damage; and\n(5) Learn the potential causes, types, sizes, and consequences of fire and the\nappropriate use of portable fire extinguishers and other on-site fire control\nequipment, involving, where feasible, a simulated pipeline emergency\ncondition.\nCaliber failed to provide records demonstrating that Part 195 Emergency Response\nPlan (ERP) training requirements were met. Although the operator claimed the Part\n195 ERP training was joint with the OPA drill training, the operator failed to provide\nrecords demonstrating that Part 195 ERP training requirements in 195.403 (a) were\nincluded.\n2\n\n\n\n3. §195.440 Public awareness\n(a) …\n(c) The operator must follow the general program recommendations, including\nbaseline and supplemental requirements of API RP 1162, unless the operator\nprovides justification in its program or procedural manual as to why compliance\nwith all or certain provisions of the recommended practice is not practicable and\nnot necessary for safety.\nAPI RP 1162\nSection 7.2 Program Recordkeeping\nThe operator should maintain records of key program elements to demonstrate\nthe level of implementation of its Public Awareness Program. Record keeping\nshould include:\na. b. c. Lists of records or other documentation of stakeholder audiences with\nwhom the operator communicated.\nCopies of all material provided to each stakeholder audiences.\nAll program evaluations, including current results, follow-up actions and\nexpected results.\nSection 3 Stakeholder Audiences\nOne of the initial tasks in developing a Public Awareness Program is to identify\nthe audience(s) that should receive the program’s messages. This section defines\nthe intended audiences for the operator’s Public Awareness Program and\nprovides examples (not all inclusive) of each audience. Further explanation and\nexamples are included in Appendix B. This information should help the operator\nclarify whom it is trying to reach with its program. The following audiences are\nconsidered “stakeholders” of the pipeline operator’s Public Awareness Program.\nThe four intended “Stakeholder Audiences” include:\n Affected public\n Emergency officials\n Local public officials\n Excavators.\nThe operator should consider tailoring its communication coverage area to fit its\nparticular pipeline location and release consequences. The operator would be\nexpected to consider areas of consequence as defined in federal regulations.\nWhere specific circumstances suggest a wider coverage area for a certain pipeline\nlocation, the operator should expand its communication coverage area as\nappropriate. The ‘Stakeholder Audience” definitions listed in the table below are\nused in the remaining sections of this RP, as applicable.\n3\n\n\n\nSection 4 Message Content\nAn operator should select the optimum combination of message, delivery method,\nand frequency that meets the needs of the intended audience. Information\nmaterials may also include supplemental information about the pipeline operator,\npipeline operations, the safety record of pipelines and other information that an\noperator deems appropriate for the audience. The operator is reminded that\ncommunications\nmaterials should be provided in the language(s) spoken by a significant portion of\nthe intended audience.\nThe basic message conveyed to the intended audience should provide information\nthat will allow the operator to meet the program objectives. The communications\nshould include enough information so that in the event of a pipeline emergency,\nthe intended audience will know how to identify a potential hazard, protect\nthemselves, notify emergency response personnel, and notify the pipeline\noperator. Several components of these messages are discussed in this section.\nSection 8.3 MEASURING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION\nThe operator should complete an annual audit or review of whether the program\nhas been developed and implemented according to the guidelines in this RP. The\npurpose of the audit is to answer the following two questions:\n Has the Public Awareness Program been developed and written to address\nthe objectives, elements and baseline schedule as described Section 2 and\nthe remainder of this RP?\n Has the Public Awareness Program been implemented and documented\naccording to the written program?\nAppendix E includes a sample set of questions that will aid an operator in\nauditing the program implementation process.\nThe operator should use one of the following three alternative methodologies\nwhen completing an annual audit of program implementation.\n Internal self-assessments using, for example, an internal working group,\nor\n Third-party audits where the evaluation is undertaken by a third-party\nengaged to conduct an assessment and provide recommendations for\nimproving the program design or implementation, or\n Regulatory inspections, undertaken by inspectors working for federal or\nstate regulators who inspect operator pipeline programs subject to\npipeline safety regulations.\n4\n\n\n\nCaliber did not follow the requirements of API RP 1162. Specifically, the following\nsections of API RP 1162 were not followed:\n No records of audience identification as required by Section 3.\n Baseline messages were not delivered to the four stakeholder audiences\n(reference Sections 3 and 4).\n No annual reviews of the public awareness program were done as required by\nSection 8.3.\n4. §195.440 Public awareness\n(g) The program must be conducted in English and in other languages commonly\nunderstood by a significant number and concentration of the non-English\nspeaking population in the operator's area.\nCaliber provided its program only in English and did not provide records justifying or\nproviding consideration for other languages commonly understood by a significant\nnumber and concentration of the non-English speaking population in the operator's\narea.\n5. §195.507 Recordkeeping.\nEach operator shall maintain records that demonstrate compliance with this\nsubpart.\na) Qualification records shall include:\n(1) Identification of qualified individual(s);\n(2) Identification of the covered tasks the individual is qualified to\nperform;\n(3) Date(s) of current qualification; and\n(4) Qualification method(s).\n(b) Records supporting an individual's current qualification shall be maintained\nwhile the individual is performing the covered task. Records of prior qualification\nand records of individuals no longer performing covered tasks shall be retained\nfor a period of five years.\nCaliber did not retain records supporting individuals’ operator qualification for a\nperiod of five years. Historical contractor records from 2014 and 2015 were not\navailable during the inspection. A project is underway to move historical contractor\nOQ records to a vendor (Veriforce) starting in February 2016 with completion\n5\n\n\n\nestimated on April 30, 2016. Operator did not provide sample records after April 30,\n2016 as requested. Missing records are as follows:\nType of Qualified\nIndividual\nNumber of\nIndividuals\nMinimum Covered Tasks affected\nEmployee 8 3: above ground pipe coating, valve inspection,\npipeline disconnection\nCorrosion\nContractor\n1 2: cathodic protection readings, rectifier\nreadings\n1 1: test PSV valve\nPSV Valve\nTesting\nContractor\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to\nexceed $209,002 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,090,022\nfor a related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting\ndocuments involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement\naction or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the items\nidentified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Caliber being subject to additional\nenforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer\nto CPF 3-2017-6013W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this\nenforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion\nof your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along\nwith the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with\nthe portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why\nyou believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C.\n552(b).\nSincerely,\nAllan C. Beshore\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n6","truncated":false,"body_characters":11875}