# BP PIPELINE (NORTH AMERICA) INC. — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 420055045
- **title:** BP PIPELINE (NORTH AMERICA) INC. — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2005-10-25
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.452(j)(3).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420055045.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420055045.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420055045
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420055045
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving BP PIPELINE (NORTH AMERICA) INC.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 195,  195.452(j)(3). The case was opened on 2005-10-25 and is reported as closed as of 2006-07-06. Proposed civil penalty: $10,000. Assessed civil penalty: $10,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

420055045_Final Order_04262006.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420055045/420055045_Final%20Order_04262006.pdf

420055045_final order_04262006_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420055045/420055045_final%20order_04262006_text.pdf

CPF_NO_4-2005-5045.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420055045/CPF_NO_4-2005-5045.pdf

CPF_NO_4_2005_5045.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420055045/CPF_NO_4_2005_5045.pdf

420055045_final order_04262006_text.pdf

U. S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration
400 Seventh Street, S W
Washington, D. C 20590
APR 2 6 ~t"-0
Mr. Jim Lamina
President
BP Pipeline (North America) Inc.
28100 Torch Pkwy
Warrenville, IL 60555-3938
Re: CPF No. 4-2005-5045
Dear Mr. Lamanna:
Enclosed is the Fmal Order issued by the Associate Administrator f
r Pipeline Safety in
the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of violation, assesses a c'
vil penalty of $10, 000,
and specifies actions to be taken to comply with the pipeline safety reg
lations. The penalty
payment terms are set forth in the Final Order. When the civil penalty i
ls paid and the terms of
the compliance order completed, as determined by the Director, Sonthni
est Region, this
enforcement action will be closed. Your receipt of the Final Order con0
titutes service under
49 C. F. R. $ 190. 5.
Sincerely,
James Reynolds
I
Pipehne Compliance Regi]try ~
Office of Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
CERTIFIED MAIL — RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
In the Matter of
BP Pipelines (North America), Inc.
,
Respondent
CPF No. 4-2 05-5045
FINAL ORDER
On July 11 — 15 and 25 — 29, 2005, pursuant to 49 U. S. C. g 60117, repres
tatives of the Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's (PHMSA) Office of Pi
eline Safety conducted
an on-site pipeline safety inspection of Respondent's integrity manag
ent program (IMP) in
Warrenville, Illinois. As a result of the inspection, the Director, Sou
west Region, issued to
Respondent, by letter dated October 25, 2005, a Notice of Probable Vi
)lation, Proposed Civil
Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with
C. F. R. ) 190. 207, the
Notice proposed finding that Respondent had violated 49 C. F. R. Part 195
and proposed assessing
a civil penalty of $10, 000 for the alleged violation. The Notice
/so proposed ordering
Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violation.
Respondent responded to the Notice by letter dated November 30, 2005.
the allegation of violation and requested a hearing. On March 20, 2006'
documentation for the hearing, which was held via telephone conference t
Respondent contested
Respondent submitted
e same day.
FINDING OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. $ 195. 452(f)(5), (j)(1)) an
d (j)(3) by failing to
establish a documented process for establishing integrity assessment i terv
als that meets the
requirements at $ 195. 452(j)(3). During the July 2005 inspection, PHMS
inspectors discovered
Respondent's procedures provided for assessment interval determinations b
y an inline inspection
(ILI) specialist based on the integrity assessment results and repair history
without any written
process guidance and consideration of the factors at g 195. 452(j)(3).
e Notice alleged this
issue was previously identified in a Notice of Probable Violation (CPF N5.
5-2003-5031) as Item
10, for which a warning was issued. The Final Order in that case was issu d
on May 16, 2005.
Section 195. 452(f)(5) requires Respondent to have a written integrity ma
includes a continual process of assessment and evaluation to maintain pip
195. 452(j)(1) requires Respondent to continue to assess the line pipe at
agement program that
line integrity. Section
specified intervals and



periodically evaluate the integrity of each pipehne segment that could a
feet a high consequence
area (HCA). Section 195. 452(J)(3) requires Respondent to establish int
prvals not to exceed five
(5) years for continually assessing the line pipe's integrity. The interv
1 must be based on the
risk the line pipe poses to the HCA (to determine priority), the factors s
ecified in paragraph (e)
of ) 195. 452, the analysis of the results from the last integrity assessm
nt, and the information
analysis required by paragraph (g) of $ 195. 452.
In its Response and at the hearing, Respondent contested the allegation t
at a violation occurred.
Respondent acknowledged receiving the warning for the same issue in
CPF No. 5-2003-5031,
Item 10, and asserted that it had taken measures in response to that
arning to satisfactorily
address the issue. In response to the Notice issued in that case,
espondent amended its
procedures to include a requirement that an ILI Specialist provide a rec
mmendation addressing
the schedule for the next reassessment based on the comparison of
orrosion anomaly data
between all ILI data available for the particular segment being evaluate
. Respondent provided
PHMSA a copy of those amendments prior to issuance of the Final Ord
. Respondent believed
that PHMSA had accepted those changes as meeting the requirement of
the regulation based on
language in the Final Order, issued on May 16, 2005, which read:
The Notice did not propose a civil penalty or corrective action for Items 10 and 12
but warned Respondent that it should take appropriate corrective action to correct
the items. Respondent presented information in its response sh wing that it has
addressed the cited items. Respondent is again warned that if OPS finds a
'
violation in a subsequent inspection, enforcement action will be t en.
The Final Order, however, did not make a finding that Respondent'
compliance with respect to Item 10. The Final Order merely do
Respondent had taken action in an effort to achieve compliance. Acco
repeated PHMSA's warning that enforcement action would be taken if
found that compliance had not be achieved. PHMSA performed that s
July 2005.
$ actions had achieved
umented the fact that
dingly, the Final Order
subsequent inspection
bsequent inspection in
During the July 2005 inspection, relevant portions of Respondent's pro
section 4, paragraph 5) instructed an ILI Specialist to provide
reassessment when, based on a comparison of corrosion anomaly
anticipated five-year reassessment interval needed to be modified.
include a process for determining integrity assessment intervals in accortI
factors in $ 195. 452(j)(3), including the risk the line pipe poses to the H
in paragraph (e) of ) 195. 452, the analysis of the results from the last i
the information analysis required by paragraph (g) of $ 195. 452.
edures (BPPL-SP-200,
recommendation for
ata and ILI data, the
e procedures did not
ance with the specified
A, the factors specified
egrity assessment, and
Accordingly, I find Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. ) 195. 452(f)(5), (j)(1), and (1)(3) as alleged in
the Notice. This finding of violation will be considered a prior offe se in any subsequent
enforcement action taken against Respondent.
Final Order, CPF No. 5-2003-5031, p. 6 (May 16, 2005)



ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY
Under 49 U. S. C. $ 60122, Respondent is subject to a civil penalty not
violation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of $1, 000, 000
violations. The Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $10, 000 for the
to exceed $100, 000 per
for any related series of
volation.
49 U. S. C. $ 60122 and 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 225 require that, in determinin
penalty, I consider the following criteria: nature, circumstances, and
degree of Respondent's cuipabiitty, history of Respondent's prior offen)
to pay the penalty, good faith by Respondent in attempting to achieve c
Respondent's ability to continue in business, and such other matters as j
the amount of the civil
avity of the violation,
es, Respondent's ability
mpliance, the effect on
stice may require.
Respondent failed to establish intervals for continually assessing pipeli
e integrity based on the
factors and analyses specified in g 195. 452(j)(3). Failure to establish
adequate reassessment
schedule may delay timely remediation of integrity issues on segments
at could affect an HCA,
which could result in a pipeline failure affecting an HCA. At the hearin
, Respondent explained
that it believed PHMSA had approved its amendments to the same pr
cedures in response to
CPF No. 5-2003-5031. While the Final Order issued in that case docu
gented that Respondent
had taken action in an effort to achieve compliance, no finding w
Q made as to whether
Respondent's actions had achieved compliance.
During the hearing, Respondent asserted PHMSA should have brought
~s case with a Notice of
Amendment rather than a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil
Penalty, and Proposed
Compliance Order (NOPV). Where a defect in Respondent's procedur '
constitutes a probable
violation of a regulatory requirement, however, the Regional Director,
n his or her discretion,
may issue an NOPV charging Respondent with that violation and pro
+se a civil penalty and
compliance order.
Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the asses
Respondent a total civil penalty of $10, 000. Respondent has the abi
without adversely affecting its ability to continue in business.
ent criteria, I assess
ity to pay this penalty
Payment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. P
)yment may be made by
sending a certified check or money order (containing the CPF Number
for this case) payable to
"U. S. Department of Transportation" to the Federal Aviation Adminis
tIation, Mike Monroney
Aeronautical Center, Financial Operations Division (AMZ-300), P. O.
Box 25082, Oklahoma
City, OK 73125.
Federal regulations (49 C. F. R. $ 89. 21(b)(3)) also permit this payme
t to be made by wire
transfer, through the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwirf
), to the account of the
U. S. Treasury. Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure. Qu
stions concerning wire
transfers should be directed to: Financial Operations Division (AMZ-
)00), Federal Aviation
Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, P. O. Box 2508
f, Oklahoma City, OK
73125; (405) 954-8893.
49 C. F. R. )) 190 207, 190. 217 and 190. 221.



Failure to pay the $10, 000 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest
in accordance with 31 U. S. C. ( 3717, 31 C. F. R. $ 901. 9 and 49 C. F.
those same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per
payment is not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure
may result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for approp
States District Court.
t the current annual rate
. g 89. 23. Pursuant to
um will be charged if
to pay the civil penalty
ate action in a United
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to the violat
$ 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous
operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable saf
under Chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U. S. C. $ 60118(b)
Respondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance
regulations applicable to its operations. Respondent must—
n. Under 49 U. S. C.
liquids or who owns or
y standards established
d 49 C. F. R. g 190. 217,
with the pipeline safety
1. Prepare a written process for estabhshing integrity assessmen
intervals, which meets
the requirements of 49 C. F. R. g 195. 452(j)(3). The pr
cess must ensure that
assessment intervals are based on specific factors and guidel
'nes, including, but not
limited to, leak history, preventive and mitigative action
and remediation of
,
conditions per repair criteria at 49 C. F. R. g 195. 452(h), as a
plicable. The process
must also consider other "triggers" that may require reass
sment sooner than the
determined intervals, including, but not limited to, time-de
endent events, such as
internal and external corrosion, and non time-dependent ev
ts, such as third party
damage, stress corrosion cracking, and operational changes,
that may be identified
following a release or during the performance of routine opera
ions, maintenance, and
inspection tasks. The process must account for threats to th
integrity of pipelines
identified in the risk analysis and must provide justification fo
) excluding such threats
&om consideration, if applicable.
Prepare a timeline for applying the process developed in I
)em 1 for the pipeline
systems included in Respondent's Integrity Management Pro
Complete the above items within 30 days of receipt of this
documentation of completion to the Director, Southwest Re
Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrati
Dr.
,
Suite 1110, Houston, Texas 77074-2948.
inal Order and submit
on, Office of Pipeline
n, 8701 South Gessner
The Director, Southwest Region, may grant an extension of time to c
required items upon a written request timely submitted by the Respond
cause for an extension.
mply with any of the
t demonstrating good
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the assessment of civil pe
$100, 000 per day and in referral to the Attorney General for appropriate r
District Court.
alties of not more than
lief in a United States



Under 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petitio '
for Reconsideration of
this Final Order. The petition must be received within 20 days of Res
ndent's receipt of this
Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). Th)
filing of the petition
automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. All ot
Per terms of the order,
including any required corrective action, remain in full effect unless the Al.
ssociate Administrator,
upon request, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order
Iue effective on receipt.
APR 26
tac y rard
A ciate Admimstrator
for Pipeline Safety
Date Issued
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 14384