{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420095010","title":"TE PRODUCTS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2009-08-31","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(a), 195.428(a), 195.428(d), 195.589(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420095010.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420095010.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420095010","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420095010","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving TE PRODUCTS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(a),  195.428(a),  195.428(d),  195.589(c). The case was opened on 2009-08-31 and is reported as closed as of 2011-01-05. Proposed civil penalty: $72,400. Assessed civil penalty: $53,400. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420095010_FinalOrder_12302010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420095010/420095010_FinalOrder_12302010.pdf\n\n420095010_FinalOrder_12302010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420095010/420095010_FinalOrder_12302010_text.pdf\n\n420095010_NOPV PCP PCO_08312009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420095010/420095010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_08312009.pdf\n\n420095010_NOPV PCP PCO_08312009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420095010/420095010_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_08312009_text.pdf\n\n420095010_Operator_Response_10082009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420095010/420095010_Operator_Response_10082009.pdf\n\n420095010_FinalOrder_12302010_text.pdf\n\nDEC 30 2010\nMr. Terry L. Hurlburt\nSenior Vice President, Operations\nEnterprise Products Operating, LLC\nP. O. Box 4324\nHouston, TX 77210-4324\nRe: CPF No. 4-2009-5010\nDear Mr. Hurlburt:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It withdraws one\nallegation of violation, makes two findings of violation, assesses a civil penalty of $53,400, and\nfinds that Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC, has completed the actions specified\nin the Notice to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. The penalty payment terms are set\nforth in the Final Order. When the civil penalty has been paid, this enforcement action will be\nclosed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,\nor as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, PHMSA\nMr. Josh E. Kohler\nManager, Pipeline Compliance\nTexas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC\n1100 Louisiana Street, Suite 1600\nHouston, TX 77002-5227\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7005 1160 0001 0040 0030]\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n____________________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nTexas Eastern Products )\nPipeline Company, LLC, ) CPF No. 4-2009-5010\n)\na subsidiary of )\nEnterprise Products Operating, LLC, )\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn October 21-24 and 27-31, 2008, and January 15, 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117,\nrepresentatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and\nrecords of Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC (TEPPCO or Respondent), in\nLouisiana and Texas. Following a merger with subsidiaries of Enterprise Products Partners,\nL.P., on October 26, 2009, TEPPCO is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Enterprise Products\nmiles of pipelines carrying refined petroleum products and highly volatile liquids.\nOperating, LLC (Enterprise).1 At the time of the inspection, TEPPCO’s system included 4,500\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated August 31, 2009, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil\nPenalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the\nNotice proposed finding that TEPPCO had committed various violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195,\nassessing a civil penalty of $72,400 for the alleged violations, and ordering Respondent to take\ncertain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also proposed finding that\nRespondent had committed certain other probable violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and warning\nRespondent to take appropriate corrective action or be subject to future enforcement action.\nTEPPCO responded to the Notice by letter dated October 8, 2009 (Response). The company\ncontested one of the allegations and described the steps it had taken to complete the terms of the\nproposed compliance order. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its\nright to one.\n1 SEC Form 10-K, Enterprise Products Partners, L.P., March 1, 2010.\n\n\n\n2\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 195, as follows:\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a), which states:\n§ 195.428 – Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator\nshall, at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar\nyear, or in the case of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at\nintervals not to exceed 7 ½ months, but at least twice each calendar year,\ninspect and test each pressure limiting device, relief valve, pressure\nregulator, or other item of pressure control equipment to determine that it\nis functioning properly, is in good mechanical condition, and is adequate\nfrom the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service\nin which it is used.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to conduct\nrequired inspections of two pressure control valves at intervals not exceeding 7½ months, but at\nleast twice each calendar year. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent could not\nprovide documentation to indicate that the Hankamer Station valves, which are part of a pipeline\nused to carry highly volatile liquids, were inspected twice in 2007 and 2008.\nIn its Response, the company provided copies of records indicating that the valves at issue were\nactually inspected twice in 2007 and 2008, as required. Accordingly, after considering all of the\nevidence, I find that Respondent did not violate § 195.428(a). Based upon the foregoing, I\nhereby order that Item 3 be withdrawn.\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d), which states:\n§ 195.428 – Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems.\n(a) . . . .\n(d) After October 2, 2000, the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b)\nof this section for inspection and testing of pressure control equipment\napply to the inspection and testing of overfill protection systems.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d) by failing to conduct\nrequired inspections and tests of the overfill protection systems of three breakout tanks at\nBeaumont Terminal at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d) by failing to inspect and\ntest the overfill protection systems of three breakout tanks with the required frequency.\nItem 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.589(c) and 195.573(a)(1),\nwhich state:\n\n\n\n3\n§ 195.589 – What corrosion control information do I have to maintain?\n(a) . . . .\n(c) You must maintain a record of each analysis, check,\ndemonstration, examination, inspection, investigation, review, survey, and\ntest required by this subpart in sufficient detail to demonstrate the\nadequacy of corrosion control measures or that corrosion requiring control\nmeasures does not exist. You must retain these records for at least 5 years,\nexcept that records related to §§ 195.569, 195.573(a) and (b), and\n195.579(b)(3) and (c) must be retained for as long as the pipeline remains\nin service.\n§ 195.573 – What must I do to monitor external corrosion control?\n(a) Protected pipelines. You must do the following to determine\nwhether cathodic protection required by this subpart complies with\n§195.571:\n(1) Conduct tests on the protected pipeline at least once each calendar\nyear, but with intervals not exceeding 15 months. However, if tests at\nthose intervals are impractical for separately protected short sections of\nbare or ineffectively coated pipelines, testing may be done at least once\nevery 3 calendar years, but with intervals not exceeding 39 months\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.589(c) and 195.573(a)(1) by\nfailing to conduct and maintain records of required corrosion control tests at certain pipeline\nlocations. Specifically, the Notice alleged that at the time of the inspection, TEPPCO’s records\nindicated that pipe-to-soil surveys were not conducted at 19 locations in 2007. Respondent did\nnot contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence,\nI find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.589(c) and 195.573(a)(1) by failing to conduct\nand maintain records of required corrosion control tests at certain pipeline locations.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; Respondent’s\nability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing\nbusiness; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without\nany reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\n\n\n\n4\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $72,400 for the violations cited above.2\nItem 3: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $19,000 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.428(a), for failing to carry out required inspections of overpressure valves. As discussed\nabove, I ordered that the allegations in Item 3 be withdrawn. Accordingly, I also withdraw the\nproposed penalty for this Item.\nItem 4: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $32,900 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.428(d), for failing to conduct required inspections and tests of the overfill protection\nsystems of three breakout tanks. Respondent did not object to the proposed civil penalty.\nOverfill protection systems provide crucial protection against spills. Regular inspections and\ntests of such systems are key to ensuring that these systems operate properly. In this case,\nRespondent failed to inspect and test three breakout tanks. Respondent has provided no\ninformation that would justify a reduction in the proposed civil penalty.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $32,900 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d).\nItem 5: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $20,500 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§§ 195.589(c) and 195.573(a)(1), for failing to conduct and maintain records of required\ncorrosion control tests at certain pipeline locations. Respondent did not object to the proposed\ncivil penalty.\nRegular pipe-to-soil surveys are crucial to measuring the effectiveness of corrosion control\nmeasures and indentifying areas at risk of corrosion. Maintaining adequate protection against\ncorrosion, in turn, protects against potentially dangerous pipeline leaks and releases. In this case,\nRespondent failed to conduct annual tests at nineteen locations. Respondent has provided no\ninformation that would justify a reduction in the proposed civil penalty.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a civil penalty of $20,500 for violation of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.589(c) and\n195.573(a)(1).\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nItems cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $53,400.\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Federal regulations\n(49 C.F.R. § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer through the Federal\nReserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S. Treasury. Detailed\ninstructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire transfers should be\ndirected to: Financial Operations Division (AMZ-341), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike\nMonroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 269039, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125. The\nFinancial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8893.\n2 The Notice incorrectly stated that the total proposed civil penalty was $72,500.\n\n\n\n5\nFailure to pay the $53,400 civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate\nin accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3717, 31 C.F.R. § 901.9 and 49 C.F.R. § 89.23. Pursuant to\nthose same authorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if\npayment is not made within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty\nmay result in referral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a district\ncourt of the United States.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 3, 4, and 5 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.428(a), 195.428(d), 195.589(c), and 195.573(a)(1). Under 49\nU.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or who\nowns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety standards\nestablished under chapter 601.\nBecause I ordered that the allegations in Item 3 be withdrawn, the compliance terms proposed for\nthat Item are not included in this order.\nThe Director has indicated that Respondent has taken the following actions to address the cited\nviolations:\n1. With respect to Item 4, Respondent has:\na. reviewed its procedures for the inspection of overfill protection systems,\nb. inspected the overfill protection for the breakout tanks referenced in Item 4,\nand\nc. provided documentation indicating that these inspections have been\nperformed.\n2. With respect to Item 5, Respondent has:\na. reviewed its procedures on performing cathodic protection testing,\nb. performed pipe-to-soil surveys of the P-2 and P-62 pipelines, including the\nareas that were not tested in 2006 and 2007, and\nc. provided documentation indicating that these surveys have been performed.\nAccordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to these violations.\nTherefore, the compliance terms proposed in the Notice for Items 4 and 5 are not included in this\nOrder.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 1 and 2, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195 but did not\npropose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered to\nbe warning items. The warnings were for:\n\n\n\n6\n49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) (Item 1) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to follow its\nwritten procedures relating to inspections of firefighting equipment; and\n49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to inspect shorted\ncasing vents every six months, as required by the company’s written procedures.\nRespondent presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to\naddress the cited items. Accordingly, having considered such information, I find, pursuant to 49\nC.F.R. § 190.205, that probable violations of 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) (Notice Items 1 and 2) have\noccurred and Respondent is hereby advised to correct such conditions. In the event that OPS\nfinds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to\nfuture enforcement action.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of\nthis Final Order. The petition must be sent to: Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline\nSafety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC\n20590, with a copy sent to the Office of Chief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. PHMSA\nwill accept petitions received no later than 20 days after receipt of this Final Order by the\nRespondent, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other\nrequirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.215. The filing of a petition automatically stays the payment of\nany civil penalty assessed. Unless the Associate Administrator, upon request, grants a stay, all\nother terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n\n420095010_NOPV PCP PCO_08312009_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nAugust 31, 2009\nMr. Terry Hulbert\nSenior Vice President – Operations\nTE Products Pipeline Company, LLC\n1100 Louisiana Street\nHouston, Texas 77002-5227\nCPF 4-2009-5010\nDear Mr. Hulbert:\nFrom October 21 – 24, October 27 – 31, 2008, and January 15, 2009, representatives of the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of\n49 United States Code inspected your records and pipeline facilities in the Louisiana and Texas.\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 violations are:\n1. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline system a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance\nactivities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies. This manual shall\nbe reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar\nyear, and appropriate changes made as necessary to insure that the manual is\neffective. This manual shall be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline\nsystem commence, and appropriate parts shall be kept at locations where\noperations and maintenance activities are conducted.\nTE Products procedures for fire fighting equipment states that fire fighting equipment will\nbe located at each pump station and breakout tank area. It also states that the fire\nfighting equipment must be in proper operating condition at all times and that local\npersonnel or contract services shall inspect all fire fighting equipment monthly. TE\n\n\n\npersonnel are not following their written procedures for fire fighting equipment. During\nthe records inspection, it was understood that Baytown is where official records reside.\nDuring the records evaluation of TE Products, personnel had difficulty in locating records\nto indicate that items were inspected according to your written procedures. Personnel\nwere unable to locate records to indicate that the fire fighting equipment was inspected\nfor Many pump station for the months of June 2007 and August 2007. Also, personnel\nwere unable to provide inspection records for August 2008 for the Tyler Station to\nindicate that fire fighting equipment was inspected.\nAlso, at the Beaumont Terminal, records did not indicate that paperwork was filled out\naccording to your procedures. Records were incomplete, dates of the next hydro test\ndate, any comments or the Supervisor’s signature was not on monthly inspection report.\n2. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline system a\nmanual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance\nactivities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies. This manual shall\nbe reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar\nyear, and appropriate changes made as necessary to insure that the manual is\neffective. This manual shall be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline\nsystem commence, and appropriate parts shall be kept at locations where\noperations and maintenance activities are conducted.\nTE Products procedures (Cathodic Protection Annual Survey) states that shorted casing\nvents shall be checked with a gas detector for signs of leakage every six months until\nthe short is cleared or the casing is filled with corrosion inhibitor. At the time of the\ninspection, inspectors were provided records that would indicate that shorted casings\nwere not checked every six months. According to these records, they were only\nchecked once each calendar year. This office understands that TE has a new technician\nthat has identified this as a high priority and has taken steps to assure that this does not\nhappen again.\n3. §195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator shall, at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, or in the\ncase of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at intervals not to exceed 7\n½ months, but at least twice each calendar ear, inspect and test each pressure\nlimiting device, relief valve, pressure regulator, or other item of pressure control\nequipment to determine that it is functioning properly, is in good mechanical\ncondition, and is adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of\noperation for the service in which it is used.\nAt the time of the inspection, TE Products could not provide documentation to indicate\nthat at the Hankamer Pressure Control Valves were inspected twice each calendar year\nfor 2007 and 2008. Records were provided for the June 2007 inspection, but there were\n\n\n\nno other records available during the inspection to indicate that the control valves were\ninspected twice each calendar year for 2007 or 2008.\n4. §195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems.\n§195.428(d) After October 2, 2000, the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of\nthis section for inspection and testing of pressure control equipment apply to the\ninspection and testing of overfill protection systems.\nAt the Beaumont Terminal, there are three tanks (Breakout tank # 734, 735, and 771)\nthat the overfill protection has not been tested. According to TE Product records,\ninspectors performing the inspections on these tanks have noted time and time again\nthat they were unable to test. This indicates that when personnel perform their duties in\ninspecting breakout tanks and note deficiencies that these deficiencies are not being\nacted upon.\n5. §195.589 What corrosion control information do I have to maintain?\n§195. 589( c) You must maintain a record of each analysis, check, demonstration,\nexamination, inspection, investigation, review, survey, and test required by this\nsubpart in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion control\nmeasures or that corrosion requiring control measures does not exist. You must\nretain these records for at least 5 years, except that records related to §§195.569,\n195.573(a) and (b), and 195.579(b)(3) and ( c) must be retained for as long as the\npipeline remains in service.\n§195.573 (a)(1) Protected pipeline. You must do the following to determine\nwhether cathodic protection required by this subpart complies with §195.571: (1)\nConduct tests on the protected pipeline at least once each calendar year, but with\nintervals not exceeding 15 months. However, it test at those intervals are\nimpractical for separately protected short sections of bare or ineffectively coated\npipelines, testing may be done at least once every 3 calendar years, but with\nintervals not exceeding 39 months.\nTE Products conducted their pipe-to-soil surveys in November of 2006 and again in\nNovember of 2007. During the inspection, the inspectors reviewed your ‘TEPPCO\nProducts P/S Survey’ records and there are 19 locations that were not tested in 2007 for\nthe P-2 and P-62 pipelines. The records indicate that the ‘Water too high to access’, ‘No\ntest lead’, ‘Hunters in ROW’, or ‘Not allowed access by landowner’. At the time of the\ninspection these locations still had not been surveyed, exceeding once each calendar\nyear, not to exceed 15 months. TE Products had not conducted the 2008 survey at the\ntime of the inspection.\n\n\n\nProposed Civil Penalty\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. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the circumstances\nand supporting documentation involved in the above probable violation(s) and has\nrecommended that you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $72,500.00 as follows:\nItem number\nPENALTY\n3 $19,000\n4 $32,900\n5 $20,500\nWarning Items\nWith respect to items 1 and 2 we have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents\ninvolved in this case and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty\nassessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to promptly correct these items. Be\nadvised that failure to do so may result in TE Products Pipeline Company, LLC being subject to\nadditional enforcement action.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to items 3, 4, and 5, pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to TE\nProducts Pipeline Company, LLC. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is\nenclosed and made a part of this Notice.\nResponse to this Notice\nEnclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators\nin Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be\nadvised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being\nmade publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for\nconfidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you\nmust provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for\nconfidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information\nqualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days\nof receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this\nNotice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in\nthis Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2009-5010 and for each document\nyou submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\n\n\n\nSincerely,\nR. M. Seeley\nDirector, Southwest Region\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\nEnclosures: Proposed Compliance Order\nResponse Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings\n\n\n\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nPursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to TE Products Pipeline Company, LLC, a\nCompliance Order incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance\nof TE Products Pipeline Company, LLC with the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. In regard to Item Number 3 of the Notice pertaining to the pressure control valves\nat Hankamer:\na. Review procedures for the inspection of pressure control valves, and modify\nthe procedures to assure that employees understand what is required during\nthe inspection of pressure control valves and how to fill out the appropriate\ninspection reports.\nb. Perform the inspection of the pressure control valves at Hankamer.\nc. Submit completed procedures and the records to indicate that the inspection\nhas been completed.\n2. In regard to Item Number 4 of the Notice pertaining to the overfill protection at the\nBeaumont Terminal, TE Products will:\na. Review procedures for the inspection of overfill protection, and modify the\nprocedures. Review the modified procedures with employees to assure that\nthey understand their responsibilities. Also, assure that management\nunderstands that when deficiencies are found, they know their responsibilities\nin correcting the deficiency.\nb. Perform the inspection of the overfill protection for Breakout tanks #734, 735,\nand 771.\nc. Provide documentation to indicate that the inspections have been performed.\n3. In regard to Item Number 5 of the Notice pertaining to the pipe-to-soil surveys for\nthe P-2 and P-62:\na. Review procedures for performing cathodic protection testing, and modify the\nprocedures if necessary. Review the procedures with employees to assure\nthat they understand their roles and responsibilities.\nb. Perform the pipe-to soil surveys of the P-2 and P-62, including those areas\nthat were not accessible during the 2006 and 2007 surveys.\nc. Provide documentation to indicate that the inspections have been performed,\nincluding the locations that were not tested in 2006 and 2007.\n5. TE Products Pipeline Company, LLC shall complete the items above within 60\ndays after receipt of the Final Order.\n6. TE Products Pipeline Company, LLC shall maintain documentation of the safety\nimprovement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit\nthe total to R.M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration. Costs shall be reported in two categories: 1)\ntotal cost associated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and\nanalyses, and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions and other\n\n\n\nchanges to pipeline infrastructure.","truncated":false,"body_characters":30296}