{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 320186001","title":"CALIBER NORTH DAKOTA LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2018-01-02","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 194.101(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320186001.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320186001.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-320186001","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/320186001","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving CALIBER NORTH DAKOTA LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 194.101(a). The case was opened on 2018-01-02 and is reported as closed as of 2019-06-10. Proposed civil penalty: $19,000. Assessed civil penalty: $19,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n320186001_Final Order_05162019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320186001/320186001_Final%20Order_05162019.pdf\n\n320186001_Final Order_05162019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320186001/320186001_Final%20Order_05162019_text.pdf\n\n320186001_NOPV PCO PCP_01022018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320186001/320186001_NOPV%20PCO%20PCP_01022018.pdf\n\n320186001_NOPV PCO PCP_01022018_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320186001/320186001_NOPV%20PCO%20PCP_01022018_text.pdf\n\n320186001_Operator Response to Notice_02022018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/320186001/320186001_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_02022018.pdf\n\n320186001_NOPV PCO PCP_01022018_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nJanuary 2, 2018\nDavid Scobel\nChief Executive Officer\nCaliber North Dakota\n1200 17th Street Suite 2100\nDenver, CO 80202\nCPF 3-2018-6001\nDear Mr. Scobel:\nOn July 25, 2017, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49\nUnited States Code (U.S.C.) inspected Caliber North Dakota’s, formerly Caliber Midstream,\n(Caliber) oil spill response plans in Washington, D. C.\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 violation are:\n1. §194.101 Operators required to submit plans.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, unless OPS grants a\nrequest from an Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to require an operator of\na pipeline in paragraph (b) to submit a response plan, each operator of an\nonshore pipeline facility shall prepare and submit a response plan to PHMSA as\nprovided in §194.119. A pipeline which does not meet the criteria for significant\n\n\n\nand substantial harm as defined in §194.103(c) and is not eligible for an exception\nunder §194.101(b), can be expected to cause substantial harm. Operators of\nsubstantial harm pipeline facilities must prepare and submit plans to PHMSA for\nreview.\nCaliber failed to prepare and submit a response plan to PHMSA as provided in\n§194.119. Caliber has been operating their oil pipeline known as the Rawson\nGathering System for several years as shown in its Annual Reports (Form PHMSA F\n7000-1.1) for 2014, 2015, and 2016.\nOn April 28, 2016, PHMSA received a letter and submission from Jonathan Greiner,\nPresident of Basin Safety Consulting, representing Caliber, stating, “Please accept this\nas Part 1of 2 of our Emergency Response Plan. We are compiling Part 2 and training\nrecords and will have them soon to follow.”\nOn June 28, 2016, PHMSA received Part 2, which was an excerpt from Caliber’s\nemergency response plan, from Mr. Greiner. During a review of the submitted\ndocuments, it was clear that the submissions were not a response plan compliant with\n49 CFR Part 194. On December 12, 2016, PHMSA staff contacted Mr. Greiner via\nemail asking whether a complete plan was submitted to PHMSA and noted, “It appears\nto be an Operations and Maintenance Manual intended to satisfy 49 CFR 195.402\nregulations, however does not contain the appropriate content of Part 194 – “Response\nPlans for Onshore Oil Pipelines.”\nMr. Greiner responded on January 20, 2017, stating, “I believe I sent you a previous\nversion of the document. I am currently out of town, but will get you the updated\nversion as soon as I return.” No updated version was submitted. PHMSA staff\nattempted to contact Mr. Greiner again on March 28, 2017, but received no response.\nOn July 25, 2017, the matter was referred to the Director, Oil Spill Preparedness and\nEmergency Support Division for review. The review found that the Rawson pipeline\nis within one mile of environmentally sensitive areas and drinking water sources.\nTherefore, Caliber is required to submit a response plan for this pipeline. No response\nplan has been submitted as of September 20, 2017.\nProposed Civil Penalty\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. The Compliance Officer has\n2\n\n\n\nreviewed the circumstances and supporting documentation involved in the above probable\nviolation and has recommended that you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $19,000.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to item 1 pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Caliber Midstream, LLC.\nPlease refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a part of this\nNotice.\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. All material you submit in response to this enforcement action may be made publicly\navailable. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential\ntreatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide\na second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment\nredacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for\nconfidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nFollowing the receipt of this Notice, you have 30 days to submit written comments, or request\na hearing under 49 CFR § 190.211. If you do not respond within 30 days of receipt of this\nNotice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice and\nauthorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this\nNotice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order. If you are responding to this\nNotice, we propose that you submit your correspondence to my office within 30 days from\nreceipt of this Notice. This period may be extended by written request for good cause.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 3-2018-6001 and, for each\ndocument you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\nSincerely,\nAllan C. Beshore\nDirector, Central, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nEnclosures: Proposed Compliance Order\nResponse Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings\n3\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 Caliber North Dakota a Compliance Order\nincorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of Caliber North\nDakota with the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. 2. 3. In regard to Item Number 1 of the Notice pertaining to submittal of a response\nplan, Caliber North Dakota must submit a response plan as required by\n§194.101, pursuant to §194.119, and to Allan C. Beshore, Director Central\nRegion.\nCaliber North Dakota must submit the response plan referenced in Item 1 of\nthis Compliance Order within 60 days after receipt of the Final Order.\nIt is requested (not mandated) that Caliber North Dakota maintain\ndocumentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this\nCompliance Order and submit the total to Allan C. Beshore, Director, Central,\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested that\nthese costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost\nassociated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline\ninfrastructure.\n4\n\n320186001_Final Order_05162019_text.pdf\n\nMay 16, 2019\nMr. Daniel Werth\nChief Executive Officer\nCaliber Midstream Partners, LP\n1200 17th Street, Suite 2100\nDenver, Colorado 80802\nRe: CPF No. 3-2018-6001\nDear Mr. Werth:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case to your subsidiary,\nCaliber North Dakota, LLC. It makes one finding of violation and assesses a civil penalty of\n$19,000. It further finds that Caliber has completed the actions specified in the Notice to comply\nwith the pipeline safety regulations. When the civil penalty has been paid, this enforcement\naction will be closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is effective upon the date of\nmailing, as provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nAlan K. Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Allan C. Beshore, Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n________________________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nCaliber North Dakota, LLC, ) CPF No. 3-2018-6001\na subsidiary of Caliber Midstream Partners, LP, )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n________________________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn July 25, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an\ninspection of Caliber North Dakota, LLC’s (Caliber North Dakota or Respondent) oil spill\nresponse plans in Washington, D.C. Caliber is a subsidiary of Caliber Midstream Partners, LP\n(Caliber Midstream), which operates crude-oil and natural-gas gathering and processing facilities\nin the Bakken and Three Forks shale oil fields of North Dakota.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated January 2, 2018, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and\nProposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice\nproposed finding that Caliber had violated 49 C.F.R. § 194.101 and proposed assessing a civil\npenalty of $19,000 for the alleged violation. The Notice also proposed ordering Respondent to\ntake certain measures to correct the alleged violation.\nCaliber Midstream, on behalf of Caliber North Dakota (collectively referred to as Caliber),\nresponded to the Notice by letter dated February 2, 2018 (Response). The company contested\nthe allegation of violation, offered additional information in response to the Notice, and\nrequested that the proposed civil penalty be eliminated.\nRespondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 194, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 194.101(a), which states:\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\n1 Caliber Midstream Partners, LP, website, available at http://www.calibermidstream.com/about (last accessed\nFebruary 4, 2019).\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2018-6001\nPage 2\n§ 194.101 Operators required to submit plans.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, unless OPS\ngrants a request from a[n] Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to require\nan operator of a pipeline in paragraph (b) to submit a response plan, each\noperator of an onshore pipeline facility shall prepare and submit a response\nplan to PHMSA as provided in § 194.119. A pipeline which does not meet\nthe criteria for significant and substantial harm as defined in § 194.103(c)\nand is not eligible for an exception under § 194.101(b), can be expected to\ncause substantial harm. Operators of substantial harm pipeline facilities\nmust prepare and submit plans to PHMSA for review.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 194.101(a) by failing to prepare and\nsubmit an oil-spill response plan to PHMSA, as required by the regulation. Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that Caliber had been operating an oil pipeline known as the Rawson Gathering\nSystem, as shown in its Annual Reports (Form PHMSA F 700-1.1) for the years 2014, 2015, and\n2016, but that as of September 20, 2017, the company had yet to submit a response plan to\nPHMSA, as required by § 194.101.2 The Notice further alleged that on April 28, 2016, PHMSA\nhad received a letter and submission from Mr. Jonathan Greiner, president of Basin Safety\nConsulting, indicating that he was submitting what was represented as Part 1 of 2 of Caliber’s\n“Emergency Response Plan,” and that he would submit Part 2 and certain training records “soon\nto follow.” Finally, the Notice stated that in June 2016, PHMSA received Part 2, but determined\nthat the combined document, Parts 1 and 2 together, did not constitute an oil spill response plan\nat all. The PHMSA staff wrote back to Mr. Greiner on December 12, 2016, indicating that the\nsubmission “appears to be an Operations and Maintenance Manual intended to satisfy 49 C.F.R.\n195.402 regulations,” but that it was not an oil spill response plan meeting the requirements of 49\nC.F.R. Part 194. According to PHMSA, no other response-plan documents had been provided to\nPHMSA as of September 20, 2017.\nIn its Response, Caliber Midstream (on behalf of Caliber North Dakota) contested the allegation\nof violation and stated that it had “a response plan in place for the Rawson Crude Oil System\nsince 5/01/14,” roughly four months prior to the commissioning of the Rawson Gathering\nSystem in August of 2014.3 Caliber asserted that it had retained Basin Safety Consulting to\n“make administrative changes to the response plan to create a more complete and efficient\ndocument for use by Caliber field personnel,” and that the contractor had informed Caliber on\nJune 28, 2016, that the plan had been submitted to PHMSA on April 28, 2016. According to\nCaliber, the company was unaware that PHMSA had identified deficiencies with the plan or that\n2 The Notice alleged that Caliber had failed to prepare and submit a response plan as of September 20, 2017, even\nthough the pipeline had been in operation since at least 2014. Under 49 C.F.R. § 194.7, operators from whom a\nresponse plan is required under § 194.101 “may not handle, store, or transport oil in that pipeline unless the operator\nhas submitted a response plan meeting the requirements of this part.” In other words, the operator of a pipeline that\nis required to have a response plan cannot operate the pipeline until it has already submitted a plan to PHMSA for\napproval.\n3 Response, at 1.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2018-6001\nPage 3\nthe agency had conveyed these deficiencies via email to Mr. Greiner on December 12, 2016.4\nSpecifically, Caliber stated that it had not been “notified concerning any alleged deficiencies per\n§ 194.119(b). Had PHMSA attempted to contact Caliber concerning this matter as stated in\n§ 194.119(b),5 any deficiencies to the submitted Response Plan would have been rectified\nquickly, as the plan has been in existence since May of 2014.” Instead, Caliber maintained that it\nhad no notice of any problems with the response plan until it received the Notice letter on\nJanuary 5, 2018.6 I would also note that Caliber subsequently provided PHMSA with several\nrevisions to the response plan, which was ultimately approved by the agency on August 9, 2018,\nroughly eight months after PHMSA issued the Notice.7\nThe foregoing facts are not in dispute, nor does Caliber question that 49 C.F.R. § 194.101 applies\nto the Rawson Gathering System. Rather, Caliber’s challenge to the Notice can be summarized\nas follows: 1) a response plan was prepared and on file with Caliber prior to the commissioning\nof the Rawson Gathering System; 2) the response plan was subsequently submitted to PHMSA\nby the company’s contractor; 3) Caliber’s contractor did not make Respondent aware of\ndeficiencies identified by PHMSA with the documents submitted by Caliber’s third-party\ncontractor; and 4) Caliber has addressed the deficiencies and PHMSA has approved the response\nplan. On these grounds, Caliber requested that the allegation of violation and proposed civil\npenalty be withdrawn.\nI am not persuaded by Caliber’s arguments. The Notice alleged that Caliber failed to prepare\nand submit a response plan in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 194.101(a), which provides that each\noperator of an onshore pipeline facility must prepare and submit a response plan to PHMSA as\nprovided in § 194.119. When § 194.101(a) is read in conjunction with the timeline outlined in\n§ 194.7, it is clear that Caliber was required to prepare and submit its response plan to PHMSA\nprior to commissioning its pipeline in 2014.\nCaliber acknowledges in its Response that the first time it sent anything to PHMSA purporting to\nbe a response plan was on April 28, 2016. This was over two years after the Rawson Gathering\nSystem was put into service. In addition, what Caliber sent to PHMSA on April 28, 2016, and\nagain in June 2016 was not actually a Part 194 response plan, as communicated by PHMSA to\nCaliber’s contractor via email on December 12, 2016. Even if the documents submitted to\nPHMSA on April 26, 2016, and June 26, 2016, could be construed as a Part 194 response plan,\n4 Id., at 2.\n5 Section 194.119(b) states: “If PHMSA determines that a response plan requiring approval does not meet all the\nrequirements of this part, PHMSA will notify the operator of any alleged deficiencies, and [to] provide the operator\nan opportunity to respond, including the opportunity for an informal conference, on any proposed plan revisions and\nan opportunity to correct any deficiencies.” Respondent’s suggestion that PHMSA should have contacted Caliber\ndirectly concerning any alleged deficiencies in the plan is immaterial, since PHMSA did, in fact, notify Caliber’s\nrepresentative, Mr. Greiner, on December 12, 2016, that the documents he had submitted on Caliber’s behalf did not\nconstitute a response plan under Part 194.\n6 Response, at 2.\n7 Region Recommendation (on file with PHMSA), at 2.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2018-6001\nPage 4\nCaliber’s argument that it had a plan on file prior to commencing operations is of no\nconsequence. Having a response plan on file before operations begin does not demonstrate\ncompliance because the regulations require operators to “submit” the plan to PHMSA prior to\noperations. Further, Caliber’s argument that its contractor failed to notify it of PHMSA’s\nrejection of the documents submitted in April and June 2016 does not relieve Caliber of its\ncompliance obligations. Mr. Greiner was acting on behalf of Caliber, as evidenced by the letter\ndated April 26, 2016, from Mr. Greiner to PHMSA on Caliber’s letterhead.8 Caliber is\nresponsible for the actions of its contractors in the same manner it is responsible for the actions\nof its employees.\nFinally, the fact that Caliber updated its response plan after operations began, in response to\nPHMSA identifying deficiencies, and ultimately obtained approval from PHMSA for the plan is\nalso irrelevant to the violation in this case. The first actual Part 194 response plan for the\nRawson Gathering System was submitted to PHMSA on February 2, 2018, as an attachment to\nCaliber’s Response.9 The initial submission of a response plan for the Rawson Gathering\nSystem contained numerous deficiencies and was not approved by PHMSA until August 9,\n2018.10 The evidence demonstrates that Caliber failed to submit an acceptable response plan for\nthe Rawson Gathering System to PHMSA until August 1, 2018,11 eight months after the Notice\nwas issued and four years after Caliber began operation of the Rawson Gathering System.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.\n§ 194.101(a), by failing to submit a response plan to PHMSA as required by the regulation.\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, 33 U.S.C. § 1321(j), and 49 C.F.R. § 190.223(b), Respondent is\nsubject to an administrative civil penalty for the violation. In determining the amount of a civil\npenalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria:\nthe nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the\nenvironment; the degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses;\nany effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing business; and the good faith\nof Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. In addition, I may\nconsider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction because of\nsubsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice proposed a total\ncivil penalty of $19,000 for the violation cited above.\n8 Pipeline Safety Violation Report (Violation Report), (January 2, 2018) (on file with PHMSA), at 50.\n9 PHMSA Letter of Correction (on file with PHMSA), dated March 12, 2018.\n10 PHMSA Letter of Approval (on file with PHMSA), dated August 9, 2018.\n11 Email from Caliber to PHMSA (on file with PHMSA), dated August 1, 2018.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2018-6001\nPage 5\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $19,000 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 194.101(a), for failing to prepare and submit a response plan to PHMSA as provided in\n§ 194.119. As noted above, I found that Caliber was required to submit a response plan to\nPHMSA for the Rawson Gathering System prior to beginning operations in 2014.\nIn its Response, Caliber requested that the proposed civil penalty be withdrawn because Caliber\nhad a response plan on file prior to putting the Rawson Gathering System into operation, had\nsubmitted a response plan to PHMSA after operations began, had updated the response plan\nwhen PHMSA identified deficiencies, and had ultimately obtained PHMSA approval of the plan.\nFor the reasons detailed above, Caliber’s arguments are rejected. Therefore, I do not withdraw\nthe proposed civil penalty.\nRegarding the nature criterion in the Violation Report, PHMSA noted that the alleged violation\nrelated to a failure to perform a required activity. Caliber asserted that it had prepared a response\nplan prior to operation of the Rawson Gathering System and had submitted the plan to PHMSA\nin April 2016. As noted above, the regulations require such plans to be submitted to PHMSA\nprior to operating a pipeline. Caliber does not argue that it submitted the plan prior to operating\nthe Rawson Gathering System. Accordingly, Caliber’s position in its Response that it performed\nthe required activity is contrary to the facts contained in the record and no reduction or\nelimination of the proposed civil penalty is warranted on these grounds.\nRegarding the circumstances criterion in the Violation Report, PHMSA noted that the probable\nviolation was discovered by PHMSA. Caliber does not attempt to rebut this allegation and the\nfacts contained in the record substantiate PHMSA’s assertion.\nRegarding the gravity, culpability, and good faith criteria, PHMSA noted in the Violation Report\nthat although pipeline safety was minimally affected by the violation, Caliber failed to comply\nwith a requirement that was “clearly applicable” and that Caliber did not have a credible\njustification for its non-compliance. The Rawson Gathering System is within one mile of\nenvironmentally sensitive areas and drinking-water resources, thus triggering the requirement to\nsubmit a response plan to PHMSA prior to operating the pipeline. Caliber does not attempt to\ndispute this fact. In addition, Caliber provided no justification for failing to submit a response\nplan prior to operating the line, and attempted to mitigate its non-compliance by asserting that its\ncontractor failed to inform Respondent that PHMSA had rejected the April and June 2016\nsubmissions. As detailed above, what was submitted in April and June 2016 did not constitute a\nPart 194 response plan. In addition, Caliber is responsible for the actions of its contractor in this\ncase and is not entitled to a penalty reduction simply because the contractor failed to\ncommunicate with the operator. I can find nothing in the record that warrants a reduction in or\nelimination of the proposed civil penalty based on these factors.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $19,000 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 194.101(a).\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Federal regulations (49\nC.F.R. § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer through the Federal\nReserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S. Treasury. Detailed\ninstructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire transfers should be\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2018-6001\nPage 6\ndirected to: Financial Operations Division (AMK-325), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike\nMonroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 S MacArthur Blvd, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 79169.\nThe Financial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8845.\nFailure to pay the $19,000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate\nin accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3717, 31 C.F.R. § 901.9 and 49 C.F.R. § 89.23. Pursuant to\nthose same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if\npayment is not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty\nmay result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a district\ncourt of the United States.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item 1 in the Notice for violation of\n49 C.F.R. § 194.101(a). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the\ntransportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to\ncomply with the applicable safety standards established under chapter 601. The Director\nindicates that Respondent has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance\norder:\n1. With respect to the violation of § 194.101(a) (Item 1), Respondent has submitted\nan oil spill response plan to PHMSA for the Rawson Gathering System, and PHMSA\nhas approved the plan.\nAccordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore,\nthe compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final\nOrder to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey\nAvenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of\nChief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address, no later than 20 days after receipt of service of the\nFinal Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a brief statement of the issue(s)\nand meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The filing of a petition automatically\nstays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of the order, including any\ncorrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a\nstay. If Caliber submits payment of the civil penalty, the Final Order becomes the final\nadministrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is waived.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nMay 16, 2019\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":28261}