{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32022041WL","title":"PLAINS PIPELINE, L.P. — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-03-04","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.446(e)(3), 195.446(e)(4).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022041wl.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022041wl.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022041wl","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32022041WL","body":"Warning Letter involving PLAINS PIPELINE, L.P.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.446(e)(3),  195.446(e)(4). The case was opened on 2022-03-04 and is reported as closed as of 2022-03-04. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32022041WL_Operator Response to Notice_04012022_(21-201003).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022041WL/32022041WL_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_04012022_(21-201003).pdf\n\n32022041WL_Warning Letter_03042022_(21-201003).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022041WL/32022041WL_Warning%20Letter_03042022_(21-201003).pdf\n\n32022041WL_Warning Letter_03042022_(21-201003)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022041WL/32022041WL_Warning%20Letter_03042022_(21-201003)_text.pdf\n\n32022041WL_Warning Letter_03042022_(21-201003)_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\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 3-2022-041-WL\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 (U.S.C.), remotely\ninspected Plains Pipeline, LLC’s (Plains) Control Room Management (CRM) procedures and\nrecords in Midland, Texas.\nAs a result of the inspection, it is alleged that Plains has committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The items inspected\nand the probable violations are:\n1. § 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. An\noperator’s plan must include provisions to:\n(1) . . .\n(3) Verify the correct safety-related alarm set-point values and alarm descriptions\nwhen associated field instruments are calibrated or changed and at least once each\ncalendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months.\nPlains failed to complete the verification of correct safety-related alarm set-point values and\nalarm descriptors when associated field instruments are calibrated or changed and at least once\neach calendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months. The operator stated, during the\ninspection, that prior to 2020, they were \"just relying on the fact that safety related alarms were\npart of DOT maintenance; they were dependent upon the field doing the job.” They could not\nvalidate that all safety related alarms were verified through this process.\n\n\n\nIn 2020, Plains changed its process (Section 6.6.12) to export all safety-related alarms to a\nformat where it could review the set points and alarm descriptions. While Plains staff indicated\nthey did look at all alarms, they did not have the documentation to support what they looked at.\nPlains also modified its O&M manual to include the field safety related points and flagged them\nin Maximo, the operator’s work management system, as required work tickets. This was noted\non the annual review log changes completed on February 5, 2021.\n2. § 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. An\noperator’s plan must include provisions to:\n(1) . . .\n(4) Review the alarm management plan required by this paragraph at least once\neach calendar year. But at intervals not exceeding 15 months, to determine the\neffectiveness of the plan.\nPlains failed to follow their procedure to provide documentation demonstrating compliance it\nperformed review of the Alarm Management Plan (AMP) at least once each calendar year, but at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, in order to determine the effectiveness of the plan for 2018,\n2019, and 2020. In a review of the records, there was no reference or documentation of the\nperformance measures outlined in sections 6.6.10.3.1 - 6.6.10.3.7 of the AMP. The Alarm\nManagement Review Form has dates of 3/25/2019, 10/9/19, and 10/1/2020. A note in the\n3/25/2019 review findings from the AMP review were noted in form 2018 CRM Plan and\nProcedures Review Improvement Action Items. This was a general tracking document for action\nitems from review various control room procedures. Some of the items were obviously related to\nthe Alarm Management Plan. While it appears some portion or all the review was completed in\n2018, the documentation is dated in 2019. The operator was not able to explain this.\nA document titled Pacific Pipeline Systems Console Procedures Annual Review Checklist\n6/29/2020, provided as a 2020 compliance record, was submitted as an example for all\nconsoles. Section 2 under the Console - Specific SCADA System & Screen Review provided\nquestions for review related to accuracy of the SCADA data base for alarms set points and\ndescriptions. This was not in the procedure. It could have been included as a performance\nmeasure, but it was not.\nAlso, while recommendations were made for improvements, there was no documentation to\ndemonstrate what was reviewed, results compared to metrics, findings/deficiencies, and\ncorrective actions. All that was provided were corrective actions. There were no links between\nperformance measurements, findings/deficiencies, proposed corrective actions, completion of\naction items and documentation.\n2\n\n\n\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$225,134 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,251,334 for a\nrelated series of violations. For violation occurring on or after January 11, 2021 and before May\n3, 2021, the maximum penalty may not exceed $222,504 per violation per day the violation\npersists, up to a maximum of $2,225,034 for a related series of violations. For violation\noccurring on or after July 31, 2019 and before January 11, 2021, the maximum penalty may not\nexceed $218,647 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for\na related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after November 27, 2018 and before\nJuly 31, 2019, the maximum penalty may not exceed $213,268 per violation per day, with a\nmaximum penalty not to exceed $2,132,679. For violation occurring on or after November 2,\n2015 and before November 27, 2018, the maximum penalty may not exceed $209,002 per\nviolation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $2,090,022.\nWe have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have\ndecided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this\ntime. We advise you to correct the item(s) identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in\nPlains Pipeline, LP being subject to additional enforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to\nCPF 3-2022-041-WL. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement\naction is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your\nresponsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the\ncomplete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions\nyou believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe\nthe redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\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)\n3","truncated":false,"body_characters":7869}