{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 32024008NOPV","title":"NUSTAR PIPELINE OPERATING PARTNERSHIP L.P. — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2024-10-25","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.452(h)(4)(iv), 195.52(a)(3), 195.52(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32024008nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32024008nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-32024008nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/32024008NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving NUSTAR PIPELINE OPERATING PARTNERSHIP L.P.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.452(h)(4)(iv),  195.52(a)(3),  195.52(c). The case was opened on 2024-10-25 and is reported as closed as of 2025-11-04. Proposed civil penalty: $161,800. Assessed civil penalty: $72,400. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n32024008NOPV_Closure Letter_11042025_(22-237074).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_Closure%20Letter_11042025_(22-237074).pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_Closure Letter_11042025_(22-237074)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_Closure%20Letter_11042025_(22-237074)_text.pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_Final Order_09262025_(22-237074).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_Final%20Order_09262025_(22-237074).pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_Final Order_09262025_(22-237074)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_Final%20Order_09262025_(22-237074)_text.pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_Operator Response to Notice (Supplemental) (REDACTED)_02212025_(22-237074).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice%20(Supplemental)%20(REDACTED)_02212025_(22-237074).pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_Operator Response to Notice and Request for Informal Conference (REDACTED)_11222024_(22-237074).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice%20and%20Request%20for%20Informal%20Conference%20(REDACTED)_11222024_(22-237074).pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_PCP PCO_10252024_(22-237074).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_PCP%20PCO_10252024_(22-237074).pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_PCP PCO_10252024_(22-237074)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/32024008NOPV/32024008NOPV_PCP%20PCO_10252024_(22-237074)_text.pdf\n\n32024008NOPV_Final Order_09262025_(22-237074)_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nSeptember 26, 2025\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: karl.fails@sunoco.com\nKarl Fails, EVP-COO\nNuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P.\n8111 Winchester Drive\nDallas, TX 75225\nRe: CPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nDear Mr. Fails:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It withdraws one of the\nallegations of violation, makes other findings of violation, assesses a reduced civil penalty of\n$72,400, and specifies actions that need to be taken by NuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership,\nL.P. to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. The penalty payment terms are set forth in\nthe Final Order. When the civil penalty has been paid and the terms of the compliance order\ncompleted, as determined by the Director, Central Region, this enforcement action will be\nclosed. Service of the Final Order by e-mail is effective upon the date of transmission and\nacknowledgement of receipt as provided under 49 CFR § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nLinda Daugherty\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: David Barrett, Acting Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nGary Koegeboehn, Vice President – Pipeline Operations, NuStar Pipeline Operating\nPartnership, L.P., gary.koegeboehn@sunoco.com\nRich Pepper, Senior Director HES and Counsel, NuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership,\nL.P., richard.pepper@sunoco.com\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 2\nKellie Seiter, Manager, Pipeline Safety, NuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P.,\nkellie.seiter@sunoco.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 )\nNuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership, )\nL.P., a subsidiary of Sunoco LP, ) CPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom February 28, 2022, through June 15, 2023, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives\nof the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline\nSafety (OPS), investigated a reportable accident on NuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership,\nL.P.’s (NuStar or Respondent) 10-inch anhydrous ammonia pipeline system in Union County,\nArkansas. On February 27, 2022, NuStar’s 249-mile, 10-inch anhydrous ammonia pipeline\nsystem ruptured due to circumferential stress corrosion cracking (SCC) and released 2,278\nbarrels of anhydrous ammonia, polluting a nearby waterway. NuStar operates about 10,000 miles\nof pipeline and 64 terminal and storage facilities that store and distribute crude oil, refined\nproducts, renewable fuels, ammonia, and specialty liquids in the United States, Canada, and\nMexico.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Central Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated October 25, 2024, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and\nProposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 CFR § 190.207, the Notice\nproposed finding that NuStar had committed three violations of 49 CFR Part 195 and proposed\nassessing a civil penalty of $161,800 for the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed\nordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations.\nNuStar responded to the Notice by letter dated November 22, 2024 (Response). After Central\nRegion and NuStar held informal consultation, NuStar submitted a supplemental response\n(Supplemental Response) on February 21, 2025. Respondent contested one of the allegations,\noffered additional information in response to the Notice, and requested that the proposed civil\npenalty be reduced. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to\none.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 2\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR Part 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.52(a)(3), which states:\n§ 195.52 Immediate notice of certain accidents.\n(a) Notice requirements. At the earliest practicable moment following\ndiscovery, of a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported\nresulting in an event described in § 195.50, but no later than one hour after\nconfirmed discovery, the operator of the system must give notice, in\naccordance with paragraph (b) of this section of any failure that:\n(1) . . . .\n(3) Caused estimated property damage, including cost of cleanup and\nrecovery, value of lost product, and damage to the property of the operator\nor others, or both, exceeding $50,000;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.52(a)(3) by failing to give notice at\nthe earliest practicable moment following discovery, of a release of the hazardous liquid\ntransported resulting in an event described in 49 CFR § 195.50, but no later than one hour after\nconfirmed discovery of any failure that caused estimated property damage exceeding $50,000.\nSpecifically, the Notice alleged that NuStar failed to report the February 27, 2022 anhydrous\nammonia pipeline accident within one hour of confirmed discovery.\nRespondent did not contest Item 1. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 49 CFR\n§ 195.52(a)(3).\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.52(c), which states:\n§ 195.52 Immediate notice of certain accidents.\n(a) . . . .\n(c) Calculation. A pipeline operator must have a written procedure to\ncalculate and provide a reasonable initial estimate of the amount of released\nproduct.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.52(c) by failing to have a written\nprocedure to calculate and provide a reasonable initial estimate of the amount of released\nproduct. Specifically, the Notice alleged that NuStar’s procedure failed to include a calculation\nmethod that did not require visual confirmation of the leak or physical measurement of product\nreleased.\nRespondent did not contest Item 2. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 49 CFR\n§ 195.52(c).\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(iv), which states:\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 3\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n(h) What actions must an operator take to address integrity issues? —\n(1) . . . .\n(4) Special requirements for scheduling remediation —\n(i) . . . .\n(iv) Other conditions. In addition to the conditions listed in paragraphs\n(h)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section, an operator must evaluate any\ncondition identified by an integrity assessment or information analysis that\ncould impair the integrity of the pipeline, and as appropriate, schedule the\ncondition for remediation. Appendix C of this part contains guidance\nconcerning other conditions that an operator should evaluate.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(iv) by failing to evaluate\nany condition identified by an integrity assessment or information analysis that could impair the\nintegrity of the pipeline, and as appropriate, schedule the condition for remediation. Specifically,\nthe Notice alleged that NuStar failed to evaluate and remediate an anomaly with 30% external\nmetal loss (2020 condition) identified by inline inspection on March 11, 2020, that was at or near\nrupture location of the February 27, 2022 anhydrous ammonia pipeline accident.\nNuStar contested Item 3 in its Response, arguing it evaluated the 2020 condition and determined\nit was not an immediate repair condition, 60-day condition, or 180-day condition per 49 CFR §\n195.452(h)(4)(i)-(iii). NuStar also provided a comprehensive summary of its investigation into\nthe 2020 condition, including procedural improvements to detect and remediate similar defects.\nIn particular, NuStar determined that the 2020 condition was not an immediate repair condition\nbecause the metal loss was less than 80%, 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(A), and the predicted burst\npressure (2,239.5 pounds per square inch gauge (psig)) was greater than the maximum operating\npressure (MOP) (1,340 psig), 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(B). In addition, NuStar determined that\nthe 2020 condition was not a 180-day condition because the safe calculated operating pressure\n(1,612.5 psig) was greater than MOP (1,340 psig), 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(D), and it was\nnot general corrosion and had less than 50% predicted wall loss, 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(E)\nand (F).\nThe 2020 condition was not identified as a dent, potential crack indication, corrosion of or along\na longitudinal seam weld, a gouge or groove greater than 12.5% of nominal wall thickness, and\nnot identified as requiring immediate action, therefore 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(i)(C), (D), (E),\n195.452(h)(4)(ii)(A), (B), 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(A), (B), (C), (G), (H), and (I) were not applicable.\nIn addition to immediate repair, 60-day, and 180-day conditions, section 195.452(h)(4)(iv)\nrequires operators to evaluate “other conditions” from an integrity assessment “that could impair\nthe integrity of the pipeline, and as appropriate,” to schedule the condition for remediation.\nTherefore, a plain language reading indicates that section 195.452(h)(4)(iv) is only applicable if\na condition “could impair the integrity of the pipeline.”\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 4\nI find that the evidentiary record failed to establish how the 2020 condition “could impair the\nintegrity of the pipeline.” The Notice and Pipeline Safety Violation Report implied that the 2022\naccident was prima facie evidence that the 2020 condition “could impair the integrity of the\npipeline” because the failure occurred at or near the 2020 condition. I find that unpersuasive.\nSection 195.452(h)(4) prescribes a schedule to evaluate and remediate certain conditions to\nprevent pipeline failures; therefore, a pipeline failure itself cannot be a predicate that triggers\nevaluation and remediation under this section.\n1 To sustain this allegation, the evidentiary record\nmust contain information demonstrating that the 2020 condition “could impair the integrity of\nthe pipeline,” beyond noting that an accident occurred near the 2020 condition. The 2020\ncondition was one of 237 anomalies with 30% metal loss or greater identified on March 11,\n2020. However, there is no evidence in the record to suggest that NuStar knew or should have\nknown before the accident that the 2020 condition was unique from the other 236 anomalies such\nthat it “could impair the integrity of the pipeline.” As noted in its Response, NuStar evaluated the\n2020 condition against applicable criteria in section 195.452(h)(4)(i)-(iii) and found it was not an\nimmediate repair condition, 60-day condition, or 180-day condition, and the Notice did not\nallege that the 2020 condition falls within one of the categories of conditions in 49 CFR Part 195\nAppendix C, as referenced in section 195.452(h)(4)(iv).\nIn addition, even if the record contained evidence to suggest that the 2020 condition “could\nimpair the integrity of the pipeline,” there is no evidence in the record that demonstrates NuStar\nacted unreasonably in failing to schedule the 2020 condition for remediation, or that the 2020\ncondition should have been remediated prior to the accident.\nIn sum, because the evidentiary record failed to identify any information available to NuStar\nbefore the accident indicating that the 2020 condition was unique from the other 236 anomalies\nwith 30% metal loss or greater such that it “could impair the integrity of the pipeline,” I find that\nNuStar did not violate 49 CFR § 195.452(h)(4)(iv).\nBased upon the foregoing, I hereby order that Item 3 be withdrawn.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\n1 See ExxonMobil Pipeline Co. v. United States Dep’t of Transportation, 867 F.3d 564, 577–78 (5th Cir. 2017)\n(“The fact that the Mayflower release occurred, while regrettable, does not necessarily mean that ExxonMobil failed\nto abide by the pipeline integrity regulations in considering the appropriate risk factors. If it did, then an operator\nthat experiences a seam-related pipeline leak on its pipeline system could never escape liability under pipeline\nintegrity regulations, thus nullifying the regulations and creating a strict-liability regime that Congress has not\nauthorized. See generally 49 U.S.C. § 60101 et seq. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that, despite adherence to\nsafety guidelines and regulations, oil spills still do occur.”).\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 5\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty exceeding\n$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, with a maximum administrative civil\npenalty exceeding $2,000,000 for any related series of violations.2\nIn determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 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.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $161,800 for the violations cited above. Effective\nMay 20, 2025, PHMSA revised its proposed civil penalty calculation policy to use the version of\nthe Civil Penalty Worksheet in effect when the alleged violation occurred. The new policy\nreduces the total proposed civil penalty in this case to $150,200.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $68,800 for Respondent’s violation of 49 CFR\n§ 195.52(a)(3), for failing to give notice at the earliest practicable moment following discovery,\nof a release of the hazardous liquid transported resulting in an event described in 49 CFR §\n195.50, but no later than one hour after confirmed discovery of any failure that caused estimated\nproperty damage exceeding $50,000. The new policy for calculating a proposed civil penalty\nreduces the proposed civil penalty for this item to $63,900. NuStar argued that the penalty should\nbe reduced for two reasons. First, NuStar argued its existing procedures warranted an adjustment\nin culpability. Second, NuStar argued it should receive a good faith credit because it shut down\nthe pipeline out of an abundance of caution, and not because it “confirmed discovery” of a\nreportable accident.\nWith respect to culpability, the Pipeline Safety Violation Report indicated that NuStar “failed to\ncomply with an applicable requirement.” Operators may receive a reduced civil penalty under\nculpability if the operator finds the non-compliance and begins addressing the cause of the non-\ncompliance before PHMSA learns of the violation. NuStar did not suggest it found the non-\ncompliance before PHMSA. I therefore find no reason to adjust the culpability.\nWith respect to good faith, the Pipeline Safety Violation Report indicated that NuStar “did not\nhave a reasonable justification for its non-compliance.” Operators may receive a reduced civil\npenalty due to good faith if the operator had a reasonable justification for its non-compliance.\nFor instance, a good faith credit may be warranted if the operator’s interpretation of the\nrequirement was reasonable, or the operator failed to achieve compliance for reasons such as\nunforeseeable events/conditions that were partly or wholly outside its control. NuStar did not\n2 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 6\nargue that its non-compliance was due to unforeseeable events/conditions that were partly or\nwholly outside its control. Instead, NuStar argued a good faith credit is warranted because it did\nnot confirm discovery of a reportable accident with the initial leak alarm at 3:50 a.m. and that “it\nwas unclear to NuStar that an event described in [49 CFR] § 195.52(a) had occurred when the\nSCADA system first detected pressure and flow deviations.” NuStar misinterpreted the\nallegations in the Notice. The Notice alleged that “NuStar confirmed discovery [at] 4:53 a.m.,”\nbased on a preliminary evaluation of information available to the operator at that time, such as\nthe leak alarm, steady pressure loss, valve closures, emergency response activation, and the\naverage cost of past accidents. I therefore find a good faith credit is not warranted.\nIn a recommendation for final action submitted pursuant to 49 CFR § 190.209(b)(7), the Director\nrecommended reducing the penalty, with respect to gravity, to reflect that pipeline safety was\nminimally affected by the violation. Based upon the foregoing, I assess Respondent a reduced\ncivil penalty of $36,200 for violation of 49 CFR § 195.52(a)(3).\nItem 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $68,800 for Respondent’s violation of 49 CFR\n§ 195.52(c), for failing to have a written procedure to calculate and provide a reasonable initial\nestimate of the amount of released product. The new policy for calculating a proposed civil\npenalty reduces the proposed civil penalty for this item to $63,900. NuStar argued it should\nreceive a good faith credit because its procedure provided effective guidance on estimating\npotential release quantities but acknowledged that the “initial reported release volume was\ninaccurate.”\nWith respect to good faith, the Pipeline Safety Violation Report indicated that NuStar “did not\nhave a reasonable justification for its non-compliance.” Operators may receive a reduced civil\npenalty due to good faith if the operator had a reasonable justification for its non-compliance.\nFor instance, a good faith credit may be warranted if the operator’s interpretation of the\nrequirement was reasonable, or the operator failed to achieve compliance for reasons such as\nunforeseeable events/conditions that were partly or wholly outside its control. NuStar did not\nargue that its non-compliance was due to unforeseeable events/conditions that were partly or\nwholly outside its control. Instead, NuStar argued a good faith credit is warranted because it was\n“uncertain” if a release had occurred and therefore “delayed completing the associated\ncalculations.” NuStar’s argument, however, ignored the main allegation in Item 2 that NuStar\nfailed to have a written procedure to calculate and provide a reasonable initial estimate of the\namount of released product. Because NuStar did not provide a reasonable justification for its\ndeficient procedure I find a good faith credit is not warranted.\nIn a recommendation for final action submitted pursuant to 49 CFR § 190.209(b)(7), the Director\nrecommended reducing the penalty, with respect to gravity, to reflect that pipeline safety was\nminimally affected by the violation. Based upon the foregoing, I assess Respondent a reduced\ncivil penalty of $36,200 for violation of 49 CFR § 195.52(c).\nItem 3: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $24,200 for Respondent’s alleged violation of 49\nCFR § 195.452(h)(4)(iv). Since this alleged violation has been withdrawn, the proposed penalty\nis not assessed.\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 7\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nItems cited above, I assess Respondent a reduced total civil penalty of $72,400.\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days after receipt of this Final Order.\nFederal regulations (49 CFR § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer\nthrough the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S.\nTreasury. Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire\ntransfers should be directed to: Financial Operations Division (AMK-325), Federal Aviation\nAdministration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 S MacArthur Blvd, Oklahoma City,\nOklahoma 79169. The Financial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8845.\nFailure to pay the civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate in\naccordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3717, 31 CFR § 901.9 and 49 CFR § 89.23. Pursuant to those same\nauthorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if payment is not\nmade within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty may result in\nreferral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a district court of the\nUnited States.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1 and 2 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 CFR §§ 195.52(a)(3) and 195.52(c), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a),\neach person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a\npipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards established under\nchapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 CFR § 190.217,\nRespondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety\nregulations applicable to its operations:\n1. With respect to the violation of 49 CFR § 195.52(a)(3) (Item 1), Respondent must,\nwithin 60 days of receipt of the Final Order, submit to the Director, Central Region, a\nrevised Procedure 207 Pipeline Safety Accident Reporting that includes clear\nguidance on the estimation of total property damage indicated by a release of\nmaterials that may be reportable. The revised procedure shall:\na. Include a definition of confirmed discovery that does not depend on visual\nestimation;\nb. Include definitions for emergency situations and significant events, such as a\nrupture detected by SCADA, and provide appropriate criteria and time frames for\nevaluating each situation to determine if it is immediately reportable; and\nc. Include a method considering each relevant factor for property damage\nincluded in PHMSA F 7000-1 Part D.8.\n2. With respect to the violation of 49 CFR § 195.52(c) (Item 2), Respondent must,\n\n\n\nCPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nPage 8\nwithin 60 days of receipt of the Final Order, submit to the Director, Central Region, a\nrevised Procedure 209 Initial Estimate of Product Released from a Pipeline Facility\nto provide for a reasonable calculation of the volume of a release. The revised\nprocedure shall:\na. Include a method of calculation for all hazardous commodities transported by\nNuStar that addresses how to initially estimate a leak, rupture or rapid discharge\nof product indicated by SCADA or a leak detection system; and\nb. Prescribe a volume to be reported for purposes of the PHMSA regulations that\nis in gallons or barrels.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an\nextension.\nPHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director. It is\nrequested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nexceeding $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (see 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts), for\neach violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for\nappropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nUnder 49 CFR § 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\nstatement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 CFR § 190.243. The filing of a\npetition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of the\norder, including corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon\nrequest, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in\naccordance with 49 CFR § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nLinda Daugherty Date Issued\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n32024008NOPV_Closure Letter_11042025_(22-237074)_text.pdf\n\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: karl.fails@sunoco.com; gary.koegeboehn@sunoco.com;\nkellie.seiter@sunoco.com\nNovember 4, 2025\nKarl Fails,\nEVP-COO\nNuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P.\n8111 Winchester Drive\nDallas, Texas 75225\nRE: CPF No. 3-2024-008-NOPV\nDear Mr. Fails:\nOn September 26, 2025, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)\nissued to NuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P.’s (NuStar) a Final Order, pursuant to 49\nCFR § 190.213 in the above-referenced case. This Order included a Compliance Order and Civil\nPenalty assessment. Based on our review of the documentation provided and confirmation of\npayment of the civil penalty, it has been determined that NuStar has complied with the terms of\nthe Order.\nAccordingly, this case is 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,\nDavid Barrett\nActing Director, Central Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: Gary Koegeboehn, Vice President – Pipeline Operations, NuStar Pipeline Operating\nPartnership, L.P., gary.koegeboehn@sunoco.com\nKellie Seiter, Manager, Pipeline Safety, NuStar Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P.,\nkellie.seiter@sunoco.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":28542}