{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420085008W","title":"PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2008-03-17","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.412(a), 195.442(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420085008w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420085008w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420085008w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420085008W","body":"Warning Letter involving PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.412(a),  195.442(a). The case was opened on 2008-03-17 and is reported as closed as of 2008-03-17. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420085008W_warning_03172008.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420085008W/420085008W_warning_03172008.pdf\n\n420085008W_warning_03172008.pdf\n\n8701 South Gessner, Suite 1110\nu.s. Department Houston, TX 77074\nof Transportation\npipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration\nWARNING LETTER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nMarch 17, 2008\nMs. Margaret A. Yaege, President\nConocoPhillips Pipeline Company\nP.O. Box 2197\nHouston, TX 77252-2197\nCPF 4-2008-5008W\nDear Ms. Yaege:\nOn March 13-15, 2007 a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code inspected a\nsegment of your ConocoPhillips Skelly-Belvieu 8-inch pipeline involved in an accident that\noccurred on March 12, 2007 near Weatherford, TX.\nAs a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and\nthe probable violation(s) are:\n1. 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\neach calendar year, inspect the surface conditions on or adjacent to each pipeline\nright-of-way. Methods of inspection include walking, driving, flying or other\nappropriate mean of traversing the right-of-way.\nIt does not appear that the ConocoPhillips aerial patrol was performed on the pipeline segment\nspecified in the operator's records, or that an error was made in the patrol documentation of\nactivity along the pipeline corridor.\nAn accident occurred on March 12, 2007 where a contractor, C&J Construction, damaged the\nConocoPhillips Skelly-Belvieu 8-inch pipeline while excavating to construct a pipeline for\nCrosstex Energy. ConocoPhillips records indicate that an aerial patrol of the Skelly-Belvieu 8\n\n\n\ninch pipeline between Boonesville Station and Carlos Station was performed on March 7, 2007.\nThis patrol reported \"NO NEW ACTIVITY\" The prior aerial patrol on February 27 noted a line\ncrossing south of Pride Station but no activity was documented in the area of the accident.\nAccording to records, a second interstate pipeline operator with a pipeline crossing in the area\nof the accident also patrolled on March 7, 2007. However, this aerial patrol documented a\n\"Large trencher is cutting across line,\" and immediately took actions to dispatch personnel to the\nsite and mark their pipeline in the same general area where the ConocoPhillips pipeline was\ndamaged. While the location of the construction provided by the contractor and described on\nthe one-call ticket does not appear to be accurate, the aerial patrol for the second interstate\npipeline operator served its intended purpose by spotting the construction activity and alerting\noperations personnel on the ground so that actions could be taken to avert potential damage to\ntheir pipeline. Given that the second interstate pipeline's aerial patrol spotted the construction\nactivity in the same area and on the same day as the ConocoPhillips patrol, it is difficult to\nunderstand why the ConocoPhillips aerial patrol reported no activity.\n2. 195.442 Damage prevention program.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, each operator of a buried\npipeline must carry out, in accordance with this section, a written program to\nprevent damage to that pipeline from excavation activities. For the purpose of this\nsection, the term \"excavation activities\" includes excavation, blasting, boring,\ntunneling, backfilling, the removal of aboveground structures by either explosive\nor mechanical means, and other earthmoving operations.\nThe ConocoPhillips procedures for damage prevention from excavation activities include forms\nto document the response by the operator's line locators to one-call notifications. Some of\nthese forms were not properly completed so that the one-call response or excavation involving\nthe ConocoPhillips pipeline was clearly documented.\nA PHMSA review of the ConocoPhillips documentation for responses to one-call notifications\nrevealed that the documents that are part of the damage prevention procedures did not contain\nall of the information specified on the form. In addition, some of the notes on the one call tickets\nintended to document the ConocoPhillips response were cryptic and difficult to understand.\nWhile it does not appear that the poor documentation was a contributor to the March 12, 2007\naccident involving the Skelly-Belvieu 8-inch pipeline, ConocoPhillips should ensure that all\nrequired forms and information are completed as required by the operator's written damage\nprevention program.\nUnder 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1,000,000\nfor any related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting\ndocuments involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action\nor penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the item(s) identified\nin this letter. Failure to do so will result in ConocoPhillips Pipeline being subject to additional\nenforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to\nCPF 4-2008-5008W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement\n2\n\n\n\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,\nR. M. Seeley\nDirector, Southwest Region\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\n3","truncated":false,"body_characters":6377}