{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32022063WL","title":"EXPLORER PIPELINE CO — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-09-13","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.402(c)(1), 195.406(b), 195.412(a), 195.452(f)(6), 195.452(i)(1), 195.505(b), 195.583(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022063wl.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022063wl.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022063wl","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32022063WL","body":"Warning Letter involving EXPLORER PIPELINE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(c)(1),  195.406(b),  195.412(a),  195.452(f)(6),  195.452(i)(1),  195.505(b),  195.583(b). The case was opened on 2022-09-13 and is reported as closed as of 2022-09-13. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32022063WL_Operator Response to Notice_10122022_(21-202559).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022063WL/32022063WL_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_10122022_(21-202559).pdf\n\n32022063WL_Warning Letter_09132022_(21-202559).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022063WL/32022063WL_Warning%20Letter_09132022_(21-202559).pdf\n\n32022063WL_Warning Letter_09132022_(21-202559)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022063WL/32022063WL_Warning%20Letter_09132022_(21-202559)_text.pdf\n\n32022063WL_Warning Letter_09132022_(21-202559)_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nmhurley@expl.com; Kbrown@expl.com\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: September 13, 2022\nMark Hurley\nPresident and Chief Executive Officer\nExplorer Pipeline Co.\nP.O. Box 2650\nTulsa, Oklahoma 74136\nCPF 3-2022-063-WL\nDear Mr. Hurley:\nFrom June 7 through September 20, 2021, representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), pursuant to Chapter\n601 of 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), inspected Explorer Pipeline Co.’s (Explorer) inspection\nsystem in Illinois, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas.\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 inspected\nand the probable violations are:\n1. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) . . . .\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a) of\nthis section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(1) Making construction records, maps, and operating history available as necessary\nfor safe operation and maintenance.\nExplorer failed to maintain current maps and records of its pipeline system as required under\n§ 195.402(c)(1). Specifically, Explorer did not have each valve and safety device labeled in the\nfield. During emergency conditions, it is essential that pipeline valves can be identified quickly\nand accurately to facilitate a prompt and effective response to minimize the volume of hazardous\nliquid released in the event of failure, per procedures required by § 195.402(e)(4).\nDuring a field visit, the technician was asked about the identification of a particular valve. This\ninformation was not readily available, per procedures required by § 195.402(c)(1).\n\n\n\nThe information was obtained from drawings online, but there was no service at this location so\nthe identification of the valve was not able to be given until later in the day. It was noted during\nthe field inspection that the identification of valves and safety devices were not handled\nconsistently across the pipeline system. Some were identified by tags or markings on the device,\nand others were not. Explorer’s operations and maintenance procedures did not address device\nidentification on the device itself.\n2. § 195.406 Maximum operating pressure.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) No operator may permit the pressure in a pipeline during surges or other\nvariations from normal operations to exceed 110 percent of the operating pressure\nlimit established under paragraph (a) of this section. Each operator must provide\nadequate controls and protective equipment to control the pressure within this limit.\nExplorer failed to provide adequate controls and protective equipment to control the pressure\nwithin one hundred ten percent (110%) of the operating pressure limit. Explorer’s DOT\nProcedure Manual did not include requirements for locations not protected by equipment to\ncontrol the pressure within one hundred ten percent (110%) of the operating pressure.\nSpecifically, Revision 2.4 of the procedures did not address locations, as identified during field\nvisits, without thermal over pressure protection between valves. Both the procedures and\nregulations require adequate controls and protective equipment to control the pressure, which\nincludes thermal devices in areas that can be shut-in such as between valves. PHMSA would\nlike some designation on drawings or on the valve to indicate that the valves are, in fact,\nnormally open.\n3. § 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 each\ncalendar year, inspect the surface conditions on or adjacent to each pipeline right-\nof-way. Methods of inspection include walking, driving, flying or other appropriate\nmeans of traversing the right-of-way.\nExplorer failed to maintain the right-of-way (ROW) at an appropriate level for the type of patrols\nthat were being done. During ROW inspections there were several areas noted by PHMSA as\nbeing overgrown with some areas having tree growth canopied over the pipeline.\nPatrolling of rights-of-way is essential to help identify potential problems from third party\nactivities along the pipeline and for leak detection. The surface conditions of the right-of-way\nand adjacent areas cannot be inspected by aerial patrolling if those areas are obstructed by an\noverhanging tree canopy.\n4. § 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n\n\n\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 drawn\nfrom results of the integrity assessments, and other maintenance and surveillance\ndata, and evaluation of consequences of a failure on the high consequence area. An\noperator must include, at minimum, each of the following elements in its written\nintegrity management program:\n(1) . . . .\n(6) Identification of preventive and mitigative measures to protect the high\nconsequence area (see paragraph (i) of this section);\n(i) What preventive and mitigative measures must an operator take to protect the\nhigh consequence area?\n(1) General requirements. An operator must take measures to prevent and mitigate\nthe consequences of a pipeline failure that could affect a high consequence area.\nThese measures include conducting a risk analysis of the pipeline segment to\nidentify additional actions to enhance public safety or environmental protection.\nSuch actions may include, but are not limited to, implementing damage prevention\nbest practices, better monitoring of cathodic protection where corrosion is a\nconcern, establishing shorter inspection intervals, installing EFRDs on the pipeline\nsegment, modifying the systems that monitor pressure and detect leaks, providing\nadditional training to personnel on response procedures, conducting drills with local\nemergency responders and adopting other management controls.\nExplorer failed to establish an adequate procedure for the identification of preventative and\nmitigative (P&M) measures that is compliant with § 195.452(f)(6). The current processes,\n“Facility Integrity Management Plan,” last revised on 11/30/2021, and “Preventative and\nMitigative Actions to Protect HCAs,” last revised on 11/23/2021, addressed both facilities and\npipelines. These processes did not define time-frames for additional leak detection and\nemergency flow restricting device evaluations or state the documentation requirements, in\naccordance with § 195.452(l), for each evaluation. Additionally, many of the listed P&M\nmeasures were required per regulations and were not in addition to normal requirements based\nupon a risk analysis of that line segment.\n5. §195.505 Qualification program.\nEach operator shall have and follow a written qualification program. The program\nshall include provisions to:\n(a) . . . .\n(b) Ensure through evaluation that individuals performing covered tasks are\nqualified;\nExplorer failed to ensure, through evaluation, that an individual performing a covered task was\nqualified. The individual who performed the pipeline right-of-way (ROW) foot patrols of Routes\n11 and 12 had operator qualifications (OQ’s) that expired on February 15, 2021. Therefore, that\nindividual had conducted the ROW foot patrols in 2021 with expired OQ’s.\n6. §195.583 What must I do to monitor atmospheric corrosion control?\n(a) . . . .\n\n\n\n(b) During inspections you must give particular attention to pipe at soil-to-air\ninterfaces, under thermal insulation, under disbonded coatings, at pipe supports, in\nsplash zones, at deck penetrations, and in spans over water.\nExplorer failed to give particular attention to interfaces and splash zones during atmospheric\ncorrosion inspections. During PHMSA field inspections, it was noted that some valves were\nlocated in vaults filled with water. Personnel typically did not drain the water or remove the\ngrating to look at the pipe below the grating during the atmospheric surveys. This does not allow\nfor a thorough inspection of the transition and piping.\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$239,142 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,391,142 for a\nrelated series of violations. For violation occurring on or after May 3, 2021 and before March\n21, 2022, the maximum penalty may not exceed $225,134 per violation per day the violation\npersists, up to a maximum of $2,251,334 for a related series of violations. For violation\noccurring on or after January 11, 2021 and before May 3, 2021, the maximum penalty may not\nexceed $222,504 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,225,034 for\na related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after July 31, 2019 and before\nJanuary 11, 2021, the maximum penalty may not exceed $218,647 per violation per day the\nviolation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for a related series of violations. For violation\noccurring on or after November 27, 2018 and before July 31, 2019, the maximum penalty may\nnot exceed $213,268 per violation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $2,132,679.\nFor violation occurring on or after November 2, 2015, and before November 27, 2018, the\nmaximum penalty may not exceed $209,002 per violation per day, with a maximum penalty not\nto 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\nExplorer Pipeline Co. 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 3-2022-063-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 Brown, Manager, DOT and Regulatory Compliance, Explorer Pipeline Co.,\n(kbrown@expl.com)","truncated":false,"body_characters":11825}