{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32022066WL","title":"TC OIL PIPELINE OPERATIONS INC — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-10-31","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.402(e)(4), 195.403(b)(1), 195.440(g), 195.452(a), 195.452(j)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022066wl.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022066wl.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32022066wl","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32022066WL","body":"Warning Letter involving TC OIL PIPELINE OPERATIONS INC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(e)(4),  195.403(b)(1),  195.440(g),  195.452(a),  195.452(j)(1). The case was opened on 2022-10-31 and is reported as closed as of 2022-10-31. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32022066WL_Warning Letter_10312022_(21-201326).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022066WL/32022066WL_Warning%20Letter_10312022_(21-201326).pdf\n\n32022066WL_Warning Letter_10312022_(21-201326)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32022066WL/32022066WL_Warning%20Letter_10312022_(21-201326)_text.pdf\n\n32022066WL_Warning Letter_10312022_(21-201326)_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: francois_poirier@tcenergy.com;\njessica kirstine@tcenergy.com; tommy mikalson@tcenergy.com\nOctober 31, 2022\nMr. Francois Poirier\nPresident and Chief Executive Officer\nTC Oil Pipeline Operations, Inc.\n450 1st Street, S.W.\nCalgary, Alberta, Canada\nT2P 5H1\nfrancois poirier@tcenergy.com\nCPF 3-2022-066-WL\nDear Mr. Poirier:\nFrom March 29, 2021 through February 1, 2022, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code\n(U.S.C.), inspected TC Oil Pipeline Operations, Inc’s Keystone Pipeline (TC Oil) from Walhalla,\nNorth Dakota to Cushing, Oklahoma and from Steele City, Nebraska to Patoka, Illinois.\nAs a result of the inspection, it is alleged that TC Oil 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. § 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) . . . .\n(e) Emergencies. The manual required by paragraph (a) of this section must include\nprocedures for the following to provide safety when an emergency condition occurs:\n(1) . . . .\n(4) Taking necessary actions, including but not limited to, emergency shutdown,\nvalve shut-off, or pressure reduction, in any section of the operator's pipeline\nsystem, to minimize hazards of released hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide to life,\nproperty, or the environment.\nTC Oil failed to have emergency shutdown devices adequately identified at each pumping\nstation. Emergency shutdown devices (ESDs) were observed at Pierson Pump Station, St. Paul\n\n\n\nPump Station, Middletown Pump Station, Centralia Pump Station, Edinburg Pump Station, and\nother locations with inconsistent signage and color. When asked, a TC Oil employee was unable\nto identify an ESD due to it being labeled indistinguishably and the button was yellow in color.\nThese devices should be readily identifiable for use in an emergency.\n2. § 195.403 Emergency response training.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) At the intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year,\neach operator shall:\n(1) Review with personnel their performance in meeting the objectives of the\nemergency response training program set forth in paragraph (a) of this section; and\nTC Oil failed to review with personnel their performance in meeting the objectives of the\nemergency response training program at the required intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at\nleast once each calendar year. On June 25, 2021, PHMSA requested a list of the\nindividuals/titles/roles and their required training in order to meet the OPA 90 plan and the\n§195.403 emergency response training requirements. The training records provided to PHMSA\ndocumented that an individual failed to take the required online training course “EMS: Liquid\nPipelines Emergency Response Plans” in the calendar years 2019 and 2020. Also, another\nindividual failed to take the required online training course “EMS: Liquid Pipelines Emergency\nResponse Plans” in the calendar year 2020.\n3. § 195.440 Public Awareness.\n(a) . . . .\n(g) The program must be conducted in English and in other languages commonly\nunderstood by a significant number and concentration of the non-English speaking\npopulation in the operator’s area.\nTC Oil failed to effectively conduct their public awareness program in other languages\ncommonly understood by a significant number and concentration of the non-English speaking\npopulation in the Operator’s area.\nPHMSA reviewed a record of TC Oil's public awareness stakeholder brochures. The brochures\nwere written entirely in English. To accommodate for non-English speaking populations, TC Oil\nplaced wording on the outside of the envelope that stated German, French, and Spanish\ntranslated versions were available upon request. TC Oil stated no other languages have ever been\nrequested. Despite surveys which showed that TC Oil passed through communities with\nsignificant portion of the population that spoke Spanish or German.\nTC Oil presented to PHMSA on March 29, 2022, a revised wording on the envelopes that better\nindicates what the brochure contains. Furthermore, TC Oil presented a draft translated insert\nhighlighting the reason and importance for receiving the brochure.\n4. § 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) Which pipelines are covered by this section? This section applies to each\nhazardous liquid pipeline and carbon dioxide pipeline that could affect a high\nconsequence area, including any pipeline located in a high consequence area unless\n\n\n\nthe operator effectively demonstrates by risk assessment that the pipeline could not\naffect the area. (Appendix C of this part provides guidance on determining if a\npipeline could affect a high consequence area.) Covered pipelines are categorized as\nfollows:\nTC Oil failed to effectively demonstrate, by risk assessment, that the pipeline could not affect a\nhigh consequence area. TC Oil did not consider the effects of all drainage systems such as small\nstreams and other smaller waters that could serve as a conduit to a high consequence area. The\nrecords reviewed demonstrated that the operator failed to identify two pipeline segments located\nat Wolf Creek and Belleau Creek that could affect an HCA.\nThe Operator modeled spill points at equal distances along the pipeline centerline which may gap\nat a water crossing directly intersecting the pipeline centerline. If that water crossing led to an\nindirect or contributory pipeline segment (CPS), only the location of the spill points would be\nidentified as HCAs. As the spill points were not buffered, there was no method for the\noperator’s spill model to identify the location between spill points as being a potential HCA\nlocation.\nTC Oil identified and resolved the modeling error on or around April 30, 2020, with the\nfollowing amendments:\n• The spill model now automatically spans across water crossings if spill points on either\nside show interaction with HCA.\n• The spill model was switched to a 10 m digital elevation dataset from a prior 30 m one.\n• The spill model was switched to the higher resolution new US Hydrography dataset\nwhich is extracted from USGS's National Hydrographic Dataset Plus High Resolution\n(NHDPlus_HR) from the previously used medium resolution US Hydrography dataset\nwhich was extracted from the NHDPlusV2 data by USGS released in 2012.\nPHMSA reviewed the corrected HCA data on November 19, 2021.\n5. § 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n(j) What is a continual process of evaluation and assessment to maintain a pipeline's\nintegrity?\n(1) General. After completing the baseline integrity assessment, an operator must\ncontinue to assess the line pipe at specified intervals and periodically evaluate the\nintegrity of each pipeline segment that could affect a high consequence area.\nTC Oil failed to base the assessment and periodic evaluation schedule on all risk factors that\nreflect the risk conditions on the pipeline segment. In 2020, TC Oil changed its annual visual\ninspection program of all facilities to a 3 year cycle. TC Oil did this without performing a\nfacilities integrity risk assessment that incorporates all the factors listed under § 195.452(e) to\ndetermine the proper assessment and evaluation schedule.\nFurthermore, TC Oil failed to establish an integrity assessment and periodic evaluation schedule\nthat prioritizes pipeline segments. TC Oil has not risk ranked their facilities against one another\nto prioritize continued assessments and periodic evaluations.\n\n\n\nTC Oil has stated they have undertaken the development of a facilities integrity risk assessment\nwhich incorporates HCA’s and other relevant risk factors in accordance with CFR §§ 195.452(e)\nand 195.452(j)(2). Furthermore, TC Oil specifically committed to incorporating equipment\nfailure and incorrect operations threats.\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.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to\n3-2022-066-WL. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action\nis subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive\nmaterial qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete\noriginal document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you\nbelieve qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the\nredacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nSincerely,\nGregory Ochs\nDirector, Central Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Jessica Kirstine, DOT Compliance Primary, TC Oil Pipeline Operations, Inc.,\njessica kirstine@tcenergy.com\nTommy Mikalson, DOT Compliance Asst. , TC Oil Pipeline Operations, Inc.,\ntommy_mikalson@tcenergy.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":11029}