{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420025015","title":"BP OIL PIPELINE CO — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2002-09-05","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(c)(7), 195.403(a)(3), 195.406(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420025015.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420025015.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420025015","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420025015","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving BP OIL PIPELINE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(c)(7),  195.403(a)(3),  195.406(b). The case was opened on 2002-09-05 and is reported as closed as of 2005-08-12. Proposed civil penalty: $35,000. Assessed civil penalty: $35,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420025015_final order_08242004.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420025015/420025015_final%20order_08242004.pdf\n\n420025015_final order_08242004.pdf\n\nAUG 2 4 ? C C l\nMr. Lee Edwards\nPresident\nBP Pipelines North America, Inc.\n801 Warrenvillc Road\nLislc, IL 60532\nRe: CPF No. 4-2002-501 5\nDear Mr. Edwards:\nEnclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in the\nabove-referenced casc. It makes findings of violation and assesses a civil penalty of $35,000. The\npenalty payment tcrrns are set forth in the Final Ordcr. This enforcement action closes automalically\nupon paymcnt. Your receipt of the Final Ordcr constitutes service ofthat document under 49 C.F.R.\nEj 190.5.\nSincerely,\nJames Reynolds\nPipeline Compliance Registry\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure 1\n\n\n\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nRESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PLPELlNE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, DC 20590\n- -.. -\nIn the Matter of\n~)\nI 1\nBP Pipelines North America, Inc.\n)\n:I\nRespondent.\nCPF No. 4-2002-50 15\nFINAL ORDER\nOn November 10. 2000, pursuant to 49 I1.S.C. 3 601 17. a representative of the Office of Pipeline\nSafety (OPS) initiated an investigation of Respondent's report of an accidcnt occumng around\nmilepost 9 on its 8-inch Post. Texas to Monroe, Texas pipeline system. As a result of the\ninvestigation, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS, issued to Respondcnt, by letter dated September\n5, 2002, a Notice of Probablc Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty (Noticc). In accordance wit11\n49 C.F.R. ij 190.207, thc Notice proposed finding that Respondent had violatcd 49 C.F.R.\n$ 4 195.403(a)(3) and l95.406(b), and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $35,000 for the alleged\nviolations. The Notice also warned Respondent to take appropriatc corrcctive action.\nRespondent responded to the Notice by an undated letter received October 1 1. 2002 (Response).\nRespondent did not contest the allegations of violation. Respondent did not rcqucst a hearing, and\ntherefore has waived its right to one.\nIn its Response, Respondent stated that il was concerned over OPS utili7ing Respondent's \"Root\nCause Failure Analysis\" (RCFA) report to support the allegations of\\-iolation. OPS requested the\nRCFA report from Respondent as part of a routine investigation of Respondent's accident rcport and\nhas authority to do so under 49 C1.S.C. 3 601 17. Requests for infom~ation should not have a\n\"chilling effect,\" as Respondent suggested, \\\\>here operators have a statutory or rc_culaton duty to\nfully disclose information or to provide information upon OPS's rcqucst, such as in the casc of a\nhazardous liquid accident. Thus, ~ f h i l c Respondent is encouraged to discuss further evidentiary\nconcerns with OPS, it is proper for OPS to use Respondent's RCFA report or similar materials for\nenforccmcnt purposes.\nFb'DlhrGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Respondent did not contest the alleged violations in the Notice. ilccordingly. I find\nthat Respondent violated the following sections of49 C.F.R. P a l 195, as more fullydescrihed in the\nNoticc:\n\n\n\n49 C.F.R. fj 195.403(a)(3) -- failing to establish and conduct a continuing training program 1\nfor its Post to Monroe pipelinc system that was adequate to instruct personnel to recognize I\nconditions that are likely to causc cmcrgencies, to predict conscqucnces of malfunctions, !\nfailures, or spills, and to take appropriate corrective action; and\n49 C.F.R. 1 195.40h(h) -- failing to prcvent the pressure of the Post to Monroe pipeline,\nsystem from exceeding 110% of its maximum operating pressure (MOP) of 506 psi, as I\n~neasured at mile post 8-96, on Novcmber 9, 2000. I\nThese findings of vio lation wi 1 l be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken against Respondent.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. $ 60122. Respondent is subject to a civil pcnalty not to exceed 9100,000 pcr\nviolation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of S1,000,000 for any related series of\nviolations.\n49 U.S.C. fi 60122 and 49 C.F.R. 4 190.225 require that, in determining the 'mount of the civil\npenally, I consider the followi~lg criteria: naturc, circurnstanccs, and gravity of the violation, degree\nof Respondent's culpability, history of Respondent's prior offcnscs, Respondent's ability to pay the\npenalty, good faith by Rcspondcnt in attempting to achieve compliance, the cffcct on Respondent's\nability to continue in business, and such other malters as justice may rcquirc.\nThc Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $33,000 for violarion of 54 195.403(a)(3) and\n195.406(b).\nI havc determined that Respondent has no financial circumstances that would prevent it from paying)\nthe assessed pcnalty amounts and that Respondent's ability to continue in business will not be\ns i p i ficantly affec ted.\nThe Notice proposed a civil penalty of $10,000 for violation of 49 C.F.R. 5 195.493(a)(3). An\noperator's employees may make the difference benvccn preventing or cxaccrhating thc risks posed\nby abnormal operating conditions. Failure to provide adequate continuing training to personnel\ndecreases thc likclihood of preventing risks to people, property. and the environment in abnonllal\noperating conditions. Therefore, I assess a civil penalty of S 10.000.\nThe Notice proposed a civil pcnaltyof$25.000 for violation of49 C.F.R. 9 1 95.40h(h). Tlie pipeline\nsafety regulations require that operators prevent the operating pressure frorn ever exceeding I 10%\nof MOP to minimize the risk of incidents on pipeline systems during slirgcs or abnormal operations.\nThe gravity of a violation of 5 195.406(b) is particularly great because thc safety risk posed to\npcrsons, property, and the environment is elevaled during surgcs or abnormal operating conditions.\nTherefore, I assess a civil penalty of $25.000.\n\n\n\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent\na total civil penalty of $35,000.\nPaymcnt of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of sewicc. Federal regulations\n(49 C.F.R. $89.2 1 (b)(3)) require this payment be made by wire transfcr, through thc Federal Reserve\nCommunicalions System (Fedwire). to the account of the 1J.S. Treasury. Detailed instructions are\ncontained in thc cnclosure. Queslions concerning wire transfers should be directed to: Financial\nOperations Division (AMZ- 120), Fcdcral Aviation Administration. Mike Monroncy Aeronautical\nCcnter, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125; (405) 954-8893.\nFailure to pay the $35,000 civil penalty will rcsult in accrual of interest at the: current annual rate in\naccordance with 31 1I.S.C. 4 371 7.31 C.F.R. 5 901.9 and 49 C.F.R. $89.23. Pursuant to those same\nauthorities, a late penalty charge of six percenl (6%) per annum will bc charged if payncnt is not\nmade within 1 10 days of service. Furthermore, hilure to pay the civil penalty may result in referral\nof the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a United States District Court.\nWARNTNG ITEM\nThe Notice did not propose a civil penalty or corrective action for l t e r ~ ~ 1 in thr h'oticc; thcrcf'ore,\nit is considered a warning item. Respondent is warned that if i t does not takc appropriate action to\ncorrect its shutdown proccdures in its procedural manual for operations. nlaintenance, and\nemergencies, enforcement action will bc takcn if a subscqucnt inspection reveals a violation.\nI / ,'\n'-7 (\n*- -.4 , .a\n..\nL. L.['.* -- trJ '\ns tace Giifard\nAssociate Adnlinistrator\nfor Pipclinc Safety\nDatc Issued I\nI","truncated":false,"body_characters":7951}