{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32022031NOA","title":"PLAINS PIPELINE, L.P. — Notice of Amendment","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-03-04","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of amendment citing 195.446(a), 195.446(c)(1), 195.446(c)(2), 195.446(e)(4), 195.446(h)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022031noa.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022031noa.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022031noa","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32022031NOA","body":"Notice of Amendment involving PLAINS PIPELINE, L.P.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.446(a),  195.446(c)(1),  195.446(c)(2),  195.446(e)(4),  195.446(h)(1). The case was opened on 2022-03-04 and is reported as closed as of 2022-07-15. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32022031NOA_Closure Letter_07152022_(21-201003).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022031NOA/32022031NOA_Closure%20Letter_07152022_(21-201003).pdf\n\n32022031NOA_Closure Letter_07152022_(21-201003)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022031NOA/32022031NOA_Closure%20Letter_07152022_(21-201003)_text.pdf\n\n32022031NOA_Notice of Amendment_03042022_(21-201003).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022031NOA/32022031NOA_Notice%20of%20Amendment_03042022_(21-201003).pdf\n\n32022031NOA_Notice of Amendment_03042022_(21-201003)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022031NOA/32022031NOA_Notice%20of%20Amendment_03042022_(21-201003)_text.pdf\n\n32022031NOA_Operator Response to Notice_04012022_(21-201003).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022031NOA/32022031NOA_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_04012022_(21-201003).pdf\n\n32022031NOA_Notice of Amendment_03042022_(21-201003)_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF AMENDMENT\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: hnpefanis@paalp.com and khcunningham@paalp.com\nMarch 4, 2022\nMr. Harry Pefanis\nPresident/CEO\nPlains Pipeline, LP\n333 Clay Street, Suite 1600\nHouston, TX 77002\nCPF 3-2022-031-NOA\nDear Mr. Pefanis:\nFrom June 14 to July 20, 2021, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, remotely inspected\nPlaines Pipeline, LP (Plains)’s procedures and records for Control Room Management (CRM) in\nMidland, Texas.\nOn the basis of the inspection, PHMSA has identified the apparent inadequacies within Plains’\nplans or procedures, as described below:\n1. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) General. This section applies to each operator of a pipeline facility with a\ncontroller working in a control room who monitors and controls all or part of a\npipeline facility through a SCADA system. Each operator must have and follow\nwritten control room management procedures that implement the requirements\nof this section. The procedures required by this section must be integrated, as\nappropriate, with the operator’s written procedures required by § 195.402. An\noperator must develop the procedures no later than August 1, 2011, and must\nimplement the procedures according to the following schedule. The procedures\nrequired by paragraphs (b), (c)(5), (d)(2) and (d)(3), (f) and (g) of this section\nmust be implemented no later than October 1, 2011. The procedures required\n\n\n\n(b) by paragraphs (c)(1) through (4), (d)(1), (d)(4), and (e) must be implemented no\nlater than August 1, 2012. The training procedures required by paragraph (h)\nmust be implemented no later than August 1, 2012, except that any training\nrequired by another paragraph of this section must be implemented no later\nthan the deadline for that paragraph.\nPlain's CRM procedure was inadequate because it did not provide a reference to the decision tree\nused to determine whether assets were considered control rooms. During the inspection, the\noperator explained how they used a decision tree to evaluate facilities for control room\ndetermination. The decision tree was completed and when locations were found that met the\ncriteria of a control room, those facilities were brought into the designated control room for\nremote monitoring and control. The procedure also did not identify when this decision tree\nshould be used. Therefore, the procedure must be amended.\n2. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(c) Provide adequate information. Each operator must provide its controllers with\nthe information, tools, processes and procedures necessary for the controllers to\ncarry out the roles and responsibilities the operator has defined by performing\neach of the following:\n(1) Implement API RP 1165 (incorporated by reference, see §195.3) whenever a\nSCADA system is added, expanded or replaced, unless the operator\ndemonstrates that certain provisions of API RP 1165 are not practical for the\nSAD system used.\nPlains CRM Plan was inadequate because CRM Plan Section 3.6.2 merely restated\n§195.446(c)(1) and did not provide definitions or examples for addition, expansion or\nreplacement of SCADA systems. There was a link in the SCADA Procedure Manual that led to\na SCADA MOC Form 015. This form provided an audit check list to help verify API 1165\ncompliance when new points were added, or when assets were relocated and required SCADA\ndesign for new points or new screens. The CRM Plan did not reference the SCADA Procedure\nManual.\nThe procedure needs to be amended to define additions, expansions and replacement definitions,\nand provide examples when for addition, expansion or replacement of SCADA systems is\nrequired.\n3. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(b) Provide adequate information. Each operator must provide its controllers with\nthe information, tools, processes and procedures necessary for the controllers to\ncarry out the roles and responsibilities the operator has defined by performing\neach of the following:\n2\n\n\n\n(1) . . .\n(2) Conduct a point-to-point verification between SCADA displays and related field\nequipment when field equipment is added or moved and when other changes\nthat affect pipeline safety are made to field equipment or SCADA displays.\nPlains Pipeline procedure for Point to Point was not adequate because it lacked thoroughness of\nthe point-to-point verification and documentation, as required by §195.446(c)(2). CRM Section\n3.6.3 Point to Point stated, in 3.6.3.7, “[T]he process shall verify the data value, information, and\nany control or alarm functions and sequence to/from the point are accurately represented on all\nSCADA displays provided to Controllers by testing a representative sampling of impacted\ndisplays.” This is not an acceptable practice for new or moved facilities. Points and alarm\npresentations must be verified on all screens where a point is presented. Documentation needs to\nprovide verification of all screens reviewed. Additionally, the point-to-point test documentation\nrequirements in Sections 3.6.3.11.1 - 3.6.3.11.7 did not include verification of the set point and\nalarm descriptions. It was identified, during the review of records, that while Plains did not\ndocument these elements of point-to-point testing, they were completed, as stated by a Plains\nrepresentative, during the inspection, “[I]f the alarms didn't come in right, or points were reading\ndifferent it would not be a point to point per procedure.\" There is no reference to the form that is\nused for P2P.\nThe SCADA Procedure Manual, Section 6, is less detailed than the CRM Plan. Section 6.2\nprovides different requirements for documentation than the CRM Plan. It also did not reference\nthe form used for point to point verifications.\nThe procedure needs to be amended to provide guidance for new or moved points to complete a\nthorough point-to-point verification. The procedure needs to include, at a minimum, verification\nof values between field equipment and SCADA, correct alarm set points and alarm descriptions\nand alarm priorities, correct presentation on all relative screens, verification of SCADA tag to\nfield device and location, the individual completing the verification, and the date completed.\n4. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(e) Alarm Management. Each operator using a SCADA system must have a written\nalarm management plan to provide for effective controller response to alarms.\nAn operator’s plan must include provisions to:\n(1) . . .\n(4) Review the alarm management plan required by this paragraph at least once\neach calendar yar, but at intervals not exceeding 15 months, to determine the\neffectiveness of the plan.\nPlains CRM Procedure Section 6.6.10 is inadequate because it did not provide metrics for\ndetermining if the Alarm Management Plan is effective, per § 195.446(e)(4). Section 6.6.10.3.1\n– 6.6.10.3.7 of the procedure provides performance measures for the annual Alarm Management\nPlan (AMP) Review. While the measures were reasonable, the procedure did not provide\nmetrics for determination if the performance measures were meeting the operator’s expectation\n3\n\n\n\nfor an effective AMP. The procedure did include a review of the alarm system KPI performance\nreports. KPI metrics were adequately defined in Section 6.6.6 of the procedure.\nThe procedure needs to be amended to include metrics for the performance measures identified\nin the procedure to determine effectiveness of the AMP.\n5. § 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . .\n(h) Training. Each operator must establish a controller training program and\nreview the training program content to identify potential improvements at least\nonce each calendar year but at intervals not to exceed 15 months. An operator’s\nprogram must provide for training each controller to carry out the roles and\nresponsibilities defined by the operator. In addition, the training program must\ninclude the following element:\n(1) Responding to abnormal operating conditions likely to occur simultaneously or\nin sequence.\nPlains CRM Plan was inadequate because it did not identify abnormal conditions that could\noccur in sequence or simultaneously and provide training on those conditions, as required by\n§ 195.446(h)(1). During the inspection, the operator stated they “[O]nly train on single source\nabnormal conditions.” However, Section 9.4.2.4 of the CRM Manual states, \"Preparing the\nController to recognize and respond to AOCs, as defined in the Operational and Maintenance\n(O&M) Manuals and Section 8 of this manual, including those likely to occur simultaneously or\nin sequence.\" General Procedure 500-12 Appendix B provided a list of conditions related to the\nshut down and restart authority table. The operator presented, at the inspection, a power point\ndelivered at the 4th quarter safety meeting in November 2020, Abnormal & Emergency\nConditions, with a section called \"how do you know\" using a variety of abnormal operations to\nlook for given the different pipeline conditions.\nThe procedure needs to be amended to identify abnormal operations that could present in series\nor sequence and include these operations in the training content.1\nResponse to this Notice\nThis Notice is provided pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60108(a) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.206. Enclosed as\npart of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in\nCompliance Proceedings.\nPlease refer to this document and note the response options. Be advised that all material you\nsubmit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you\nbelieve that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5\n1 OPS is aware that General Procedure 500-12 is subject to Paragraph 23 of the United States of America and the\nPeople of the State of California v.Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. and Plains Pipeline, L.P.Consent Decree. Since\nOPS is requesting amendment of this procedure pursuant to this Notice, Plains is not required to submit written notice\nto PHMSA of the material change pursuant to Para. 23(b).\n4\n\n\n\nU.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of\nthe document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an\nexplanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment\nunder 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nFollowing the receipt of this Notice, you have 30 days to submit written comments, revised\nprocedures, or a request for a hearing under § 190.211. If you do not respond within 30 days of\nreceipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this\nNotice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in\nthis Notice without further notice to you and to issue an Order Directing Amendment. If your\nplans or procedures are found inadequate as alleged in this Notice, you may be ordered to amend\nyour plans or procedures to correct the inadequacies (49 C.F.R. § 190.206). If you are not\ncontesting this Notice, we propose that you submit your amended procedures to my office within\n30 days of receipt of this Notice. This period may be extended by written request for good\ncause. Once the inadequacies identified herein have been addressed in your amended\nprocedures, this enforcement action will be closed.\nIt is requested that Plains Pipeline, LP maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Notice of Amendment (preparation/revision of plans, procedures)\nand submit the total to Gregory A. Ochs, Director, Central, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration. In correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to CPF 3-2022-\n031-NOA and, for each document you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format\nwhenever possible.\nSincerely,\nGregory A. Ochs\nDirector, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Kevin Cunningham, Director, HSE Compliance Programs khcunningham@paalp.com\nEnclosure: Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Enforcement Proceedings\n5\n\n32022031NOA_Closure Letter_07152022_(21-201003)_text.pdf\n\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: hnpefanis@paalp.com and khcunningham@paalp.com\nJuly 15, 2022\nMr. Harry Pefanis\nPresident/CEO\nPlains Pipeline, LP\n333 Clay Street, Suite 1600\nHouston, TX 77002\nRe: CPF 3-2022-031-NOA\nDear Mr. Pefanis:\nFrom June 14 to July 20, 2021 a representative from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, conducted an on-\nsite pipeline safety inspection of Plains Pipeline procedures in Houston, Texas. As a result of the\ninspection, Plains Pipeline was issued a Notice of Amendment on March 4, 2022, which\nproposed amendment of your procedures.\nPlains Pipeline submitted its amended procedures on April 1, 2022. My staff reviewed the\namended procedures, and it appears that the inadequacies outlined in this Notice of Amendment\nhave been corrected.\nThis letter is to inform you no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank you\nfor your cooperation.\nSincerely,\nGregory A. Ochs\nDirector, Central Region, OPS\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Kevin Cunningham, HSE Compliance Programs khcunningham@paalp.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":14739}