{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32021028NOPV","title":"WRB REFINING LP - WOOD RIVER REFINERY — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2021-11-02","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.302(a), 195.310(b)(1), 195.402(a), 195.452(b)(1), 195.505.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32021028nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32021028nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32021028nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32021028NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving WRB REFINING LP - WOOD RIVER REFINERY. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.302(a),  195.310(b)(1),  195.402(a),  195.452(b)(1),  195.505. The case was opened on 2021-11-02 and is reported as closed as of 2022-05-02. Proposed civil penalty: $46,600. Assessed civil penalty: $46,600. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32021028NOPV_Closure Letter_05022022_(20-172212).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_Closure%20Letter_05022022_(20-172212).pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_Closure Letter_05022022_(20-172212)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_Closure%20Letter_05022022_(20-172212)_text.pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_Final Order_03312022_(20-172212).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_Final%20Order_03312022_(20-172212).pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_Final Order_03312022_(20-172212)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_Final%20Order_03312022_(20-172212)_text.pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_11222021_(20-172212).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_11222021_(20-172212).pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_PCP PCO_11022021_(20-172212).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_PCP%20PCO_11022021_(20-172212).pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_PCP PCO_11022021_(20-172212)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32021028NOPV/32021028NOPV_PCP%20PCO_11022021_(20-172212)_text.pdf\n\n32021028NOPV_Final Order_03312022_(20-172212)_text.pdf\n\nMarch 31, 2022\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: gerald.a.knoyle@p66.com\nMr. Gerald Knoyle\nVice President, Wood River Refinery\nWRB Refining LP\nPO Box 76\n900 South Central Ave\nRoxana, Illinois 62084\nRe: CPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\nDear Mr. Knoyle:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $46,600. It further finds that WRB Refining LP has\ncompleted the actions specified in the Notice to comply with the pipeline safety regulations.\nWhen the civil penalty has been paid, this enforcement action will be closed. Service of the\nFinal Order by e-mail is effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgment of receipt\nas 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. Gregory A. Ochs, Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMr. Todd Denton, President, Phillips 66, todd.denton@p66.com\nMr. Doug Sauer, Manager, Pipeline Regulatory Affairs, Phillips 66, doug.b.sauer@p66.com\nMr. Todd Fuksa, Director of DOT Compliance, Phillips 66, todd.t.fuksa@p66.com\nCONFIRMATION OF 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 )\nWRB Refining LP, ) CPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom February 10, 2020 through September 11, 2020, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a\nrepresentative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and\nrecords of WRB Refining LP’s Wood River Refinery (WRB or Respondent) in Roxana, Illinois.\nWRB is a partnership between Phillips 66 and Cenovus Energy that operates crude oil pipelines\nin Roxana, Illinois.1 The Wood River Refinery Crude Relief consists of three breakout tanks and\nassociated manifold piping and it provides surge relief for the Keystone, Ozark, and Capwood\npipelines.2\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated November 2, 2021, 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 WRB had committed two violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195, proposed\nassessing a civil penalty of $46,600 for the alleged violations, and proposed ordering Respondent\nto take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also included three\nwarning items pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205, which required no further action, but warned the\noperator to correct the probable violations or face possible future enforcement action\nWRB responded to the Notice by letter dated November 22, 2021 (Response). The company did\nnot contest the allegations of violation but provided an explanation of its actions and requested\nthat the Proposed Civil Penalty be withdrawn or reduced. Respondent did not request a hearing\nand therefore has waived its right to one.\n1 Phillips 66 – Wood River Refinery website, available at https://www.phillips66.com/refining/wood-river-refinery\n(last accessed February 3, 2022).\n2 Pipeline Safety Violation Report (Violation Report), (November 2, 2021) (on file with PHMSA), at 1.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\nPage 2\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, WRB did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part\n195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.302(a):\n§ 195.302 General requirements.\n(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section and in § 195.305(b), no\noperator may operate a pipeline unless it has been pressure tested under this\nsubpart without leakage. In addition, no operator may return to service a\nsegment of pipeline that has been replaced, relocated, or otherwise changed\nuntil it has been pressure tested under this subpart without leakage.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.302(a) by failing to pressure test\nthree pipe segments at its Wood River facility before operating the pipeline. Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that WRB operated its fill lines for Tanks A82, A83, and A84 without pressure\ntesting. WRB failed to produce any evidence that the fill lines for Tanks A82, A83, and A84 had\nbeen pressure tested prior to operation.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based on a review of the\nevidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.302(a) by failing to pressure test three\npipe segments at its Wood River facility before operating the pipeline.\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(b)(1):\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) What program and practices must operators use to manage pipeline\nintegrity? Each operator of a pipeline covered by this section must:\n(1) Develop a written integrity management program that addresses the\nrisks on each segment of pipeline in the first column of the following table\nno later than the date in the second column:\nPipeline Date\nCategory 1 March 31, 2022.\nCategory 2 February 18, 2003.\nCategory 3 Date the pipeline begins operation as provided in\n§ 195.12 for low stress pipelines in rural areas.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(b)(1) by failing to develop a\nwritten integrity management (IM) program within the requisite time frame for its Roxana,\nIllinois facility located within a High Population High Consequence Area. Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that WRB did not develop and implement a written IM program until April 30,\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\nPage 3\n2019, for its Ozark, Capwood, and Keystone relief lines. The Notice alleged further that WRB\nhad been operating its Ozark and Capwood relief lines since 1967, and its Keystone relief line\nsince 2010.\nIn its Response, Respondent stated that its program for managing integrity “did not formally\nalign with 195.452 requirements in entirety until April 2019.” Accordingly, based on a review of\nthe evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(b)(1) by failing to develop a\nwritten IM program within the requisite time frame for its Roxana, Illinois facility located within\na High Population High Consequence Area.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations.3\nIn determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I\nmust consider the following criteria: the nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,\nincluding adverse impact on the environment; the degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history\nof Respondent’s prior offenses; any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue\ndoing business; the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations; and self-disclosure or actions to correct a violation prior to discovery by PHMSA.\nIn addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction\nbecause of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice\nproposed a total civil penalty of $46,600 for the violation cited above.\nItem 4: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $46,600 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.452(b)(1), for failing to develop a written IM program for its Roxana, Illinois facility.\nWRB argued that the civil penalty should be reduced or withdrawn for several reasons.\nWith respect to culpability, the Violation Report alleged that Respondent did not comply with\n§ 195.452(b)(1) until after PHMSA informed it during an inspection in 2018 that its Keystone\nrelief lines were jurisdictional.4 Respondent argued that it remediated the violation in April\n2019, prior to the most recent inspection. Since PHMSA was aware of the violation in 2018\nbefore corrective action was taken, I find that a reduction in the civil penalty is not warranted.\nWith respect to gravity, the Violation Report alleged that the violation occurred within a high\nconsequence area (HCA) and that Respondent should have recognized that this was an applicable\n3 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 C.F.R. § 190.223.\n4 Violation Report, at 17, 19.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\nPage 4\nrequirement.5 Respondent explained that before 2019, it had an IM program in place but it “did\nnot formally align with 195.452 requirements in entirety until April 2019.”6 However,\nRespondent is cited for violating § 195.452(b)(1) which contains deadlines for the development\nof IM programs. It is critical for the protection of HCAs that operators have an IM program that\ncomplies with all of the applicable requirements by the deadlines set forth in the regulation.\nFailure to have a compliant IM program presents a significant safety risk to HCAs, which by\ndefinition are the most sensitive areas that warrant the highest protection. Here, WRB admitted\nit did not develop an IM program within the regulatory deadline. Therefore, I find that a\nreduction in the civil penalty is not warranted.\nAlso with respect to gravity, Respondent argued that leak history records and other information\nprovided to PHMSA inspectors at the time of the inspection show that asset integrity was\nmaintained based on a 10-year leak history documentation that showed no leaks during that time.\nWhile PHMSA recognizes that, fortunately, no leaks may have occurred during the time period\nin question, as noted above, Respondent’s failure to have a compliant IM program constituted an\nunacceptable safety risk to HCAs. WRB admitted it did not have a compliant IM program until\nApril 2019, years after its Ozark, Capwood, and Keystone relief lines and associated facilities\nbegan operations. Respondent did not dispute that the violation occurred within an HCA.\nTherefore, I find that a reduction in the civil penalty is not warranted.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $46,600 for a violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(b)(1).\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\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 $46,600 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 a violation of 49\nC.F.R. § 195.302(a). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the\n5 Violation Report, at 18.\n6 Response, at 6.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\nPage 5\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 § 195.302(a) (Item 1), Respondent completed\nhydrostatic testing on the fill lines for Tanks A82, A83, and A84 on April 12, 2021,\nMay 13, 2021, and June 4, 2021, respectively.\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.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 2, 3, and 5, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195, but\nidentified them as warning items pursuant to § 190.205. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.310(b)(1) (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to retain\nrecords of each pressure test for its Keystone mainline relief pipeline;\n49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to prepare and\nfollow a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and\nmaintenance activities until April 2019; and\n49 C.F.R. § 195.505 (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to have and follow a\nwritten operator qualification program until April 2019.\nWRB presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to address\nthe cited items.7 If OPS finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection,\nRespondent may be subject to future enforcement action.\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. The written petition must be received no later than\n20 days after receipt of the Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a\nbrief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The filing\nof a petition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of\nthe order, including any corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator,\nupon request, grants a stay. If Respondent submits payment of the civil penalty, the Final Order\nbecomes the final administrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is waived.\n7 For Item 2, WRB stated it has maintained the pressure testing records from an April 27, 2021 hydrostatic test.\nResponse, at 2.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2021-028-NOPV\nPage 6\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nMarch 31, 2022\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n32021028NOPV_Closure Letter_05022022_(20-172212)_text.pdf\n\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: gerald.a.knoyle@p66.com , todd.denton@p66.com ,\ndoug.b.sauer@p66.com and todd.t.fuksa@p66.com\nMay 2, 2022\nMr. Gerald Knoyle\nVice President, Wood River Refinery\nWRB Refining LP\nPO Box 76\n900 South Central Ave\nRoxana, Illinois 62084\nRe: CPF 3-2021-028-NOPV\nDear Mr. Knoyle:\nOn March 31, 2022, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)\nissued to WRB Refining LP, a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This order included a\nCompliance Order and Civil Penalty assessment. Based on our review of the documentation you\nprovided and confirmation of payment of the civil penalty, it has been determined that you have\ncomplied with the terms of this Order.\nAccordingly, this case in now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to the\nmatters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nGregory A. Ochs\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.\nCc: Mr. Todd Denton, President, Phillips 66, todd.denton@p66.com\nMr. Doug Sauer, Manager, Pipeline Regulatory Affairs, Phillips 66, doug.b.sauer@p66.com\nMr. Todd Fuksa, Director of DOT Compliance, Phillips 66, todd.t.fuksa@p66.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":17982}