{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320185006W","title":"VANTAGE PIPELINE US LP — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2018-07-03","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.408(a), 195.408(b)(2), 195.412(a), 195.440(d), 195.440(e), 195.452(b)(5), 195.452(f)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320185006w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320185006w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320185006w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320185006W","body":"Warning Letter involving VANTAGE PIPELINE US LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.408(a),  195.408(b)(2),  195.412(a),  195.440(d),  195.440(e),  195.452(b)(5),  195.452(f)(1). The case was opened on 2018-07-03 and is reported as closed as of 2018-07-03. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320185006W_Warning Letter_07032018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320185006W/320185006W_Warning%20Letter_07032018.pdf\n\n320185006W_Warning Letter_07032018_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320185006W/320185006W_Warning%20Letter_07032018_text.pdf\n\n320185006W_Warning Letter_07032018_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nJuly 3, 2018\nMr. Arnel Santos, Senior VP Operations\nNova Chemicals (dba Vantage Pipeline)\nP.O. Box 2518\nCalgary, Alberta\nT2P 5C6\nCPF 3-2018-5006W\nDear Mr. Santos:\nFrom October – November 2016, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.)\ninspected your Vantage pipeline procedures, records and field assets in Joffre, Alberta,\nCanada, and 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. §195.408 Communications.\n(a) Each operator must have a communication system to provide for the\ntransmission of information needed for the safe operation of its pipeline system.\n(b) The communication system required by paragraph (a) of this section must, as\na minimum, include means for:\n\n\n\n(1) . . . .\n(2) Receiving notices from operator personnel, the public, and public authorities\nof abnormal or emergency conditions and sending this information to\nappropriate personnel or government agencies for corrective action;\nNova’s telephone communications failed to appropriately receive notice when tested.\nNova’s 24-hour phone number dropped calls when the “stay on the line option” was\nselected based on inspector’s experience calling the number as a test.\n2. §195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and crossings under navigable waters\n(a) Each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 3 weeks, but at least 26 times\neach calendar year, inspect the surface conditions on or adjacent to each pipeline\nright-of-way. Methods of inspection include walking, driving, flying or other\nappropriate means of traversing the right-of-way.\nNova exceeded the 3-week interval for inspection of its right-of-way. Nova’s\npatrolling was deficient per records and clarifying emails from the operator. On one\ninstance both the aerial and ground patrol exceeded the 3-week requirement by 21\ndays. Eighteen ground patrols were performed as backup for missing air patrols.\nHowever, during these ground patrols the entire right-of-way was not driven or\nwalked.\n3. §195.440 Public awareness\n(d) The operator's program must specifically include provisions to educate the\npublic, appropriate government organizations, and persons engaged in\nexcavation related activities on:\n(1) Use of a one-call notification system prior to excavation and other\ndamage prevention activities\n(2) Possible hazards associated with unintended releases from a hazardous\nliquid or carbon dioxide pipeline facility;\n(3) Physical indications that such a release may have occurred;\n(4) Steps that should be taken for public safety in the event of a hazardous\nliquid or carbon dioxide pipeline release; and\n(5) Procedures to report such an event.\n(e) The program must include activities to advise affected municipalities, school\ndistricts, businesses, and residents of pipeline facility locations.\n2\n\n\n\nAPI Recommended Practice 1162, First Edition, December 2003\nPublic Awareness Programs for Pipeline Operators\nNova failed to meet the specific educational provisions of its public awareness\nprogram. Based on an inspection interview and operator emails, Nova did not meet\nthe message requirements as noted below:\n• Vantage’s Public Awareness Program (dated 5/20/2016) states annual delivery of\nAPI 1162 Baseline Messages rather than every 2 years per API 1162. Vantage met\nwith Affected Public audience in 2014 and followed up with phone calls in 2015 &\n2016. Phone calls and meetings are supplemental to the baseline activity but are not\nacceptable as the required printed material for delivery of the baseline messages.\nAlso, the phone calls did not cover the following required baseline messages:\n1. Pipeline purpose and reliability\n2. Awareness of hazards and prevention measures undertaken\n3. Damage prevention awareness\n4. One-call requirements\n5. Leak Recognition and response\n6. Pipeline location information\n3\n\n\n\n7. 8. How to get additional information\nAvailability of list of pipeline operators through NPMS\n• For emergency officials, brochures were mailed in 2014 which met requirements. In\n2015 and 2016 phone calls were made to gather contact information only.\nTherefore, these phone calls did not cover the following baseline messages\nrequirements of annual delivery:\n1. Pipeline purpose and reliability\n2. 4. 5. Awareness of hazards and prevention measures undertaken\n3. Emergency Preparedness Communications\nPipeline location information and availability of NPMS\nHow to get additional information\n4. §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas\n(a) . . . .\n(b) What program and practices must operators use to manage pipeline integrity?\nEach operator of a pipeline covered by this section must:\n(5) Implement and follow the program.\n(f) What are the elements of an integrity management program? An integrity\nmanagement program begins with the initial framework. An operator must\ncontinually change the program to reflect operating experience, conclusions\ndrawn from results of the integrity assessments, and other maintenance and\nsurveillance data, and evaluation of consequences of a failure on the high\nconsequence area. An operator must include, at minimum, each of the following\nelements in its written integrity management program:\n(1) A process for identifying which pipeline segments could affect a high\nconsequence area;\nNova failed to follow its HCA identification process. As stated in a 2016 HCA\nMemorandum Nova did not 1) Consider the air dispersion analysis results to determine\ncould affect areas in addition to direct intersection of HCA areas and 2) Provide\njustification for the buffer zone.\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. For violations occurring prior to November 2, 2015, the\nmaximum penalty may not exceed $200,000 per violation per day, with a maximum penalty\nnot to exceed $2,000,000 for a related series of violations. We have reviewed the\n4\n\n\n\ncircumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to\nconduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We\nadvise you to correct the items identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Nova\nChemical being subject to additional enforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer\nto CPF 3-2018-5006W. 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\ncc: Mr. John De-La-Mare\nVice President, Conventional Pipelines\nPembina / Vantage Pipeline US LP\n4000, 585 8th Avenue S.W.\nCalgary, Alberta\nT2P 1G1\nMs. Melissa Lundy\nAdvisor, Operating Management System\nPembina Pipeline Corporation\n4000, 585 8th Avenue S.W\nCalgary, Alberta\nT2P 1G1\n5","truncated":false,"body_characters":8388}