{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420111005","title":"OKTEX PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2011-02-24","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.475(b), 192.739(a)(2), 192.805(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420111005.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420111005.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420111005","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420111005","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving OKTEX PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.475(b),  192.739(a)(2),  192.805(b). The case was opened on 2011-02-24 and is reported as closed as of 2012-01-09. Proposed civil penalty: $35,700. Assessed civil penalty: $35,700. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420111005_AMENDED NOPV PCP PCO_ 04192011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_AMENDED%20NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_%2004192011_text.pdf\n\n420111005_AMENDED NOPV PCP PCO_04192011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_AMENDED%20NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_04192011.pdf\n\n420111005_Final Order_12142011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_Final%20Order_12142011.pdf\n\n420111005_Final Order_12142011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_Final%20Order_12142011_text.pdf\n\n420111005_NOPV PCP PCO_02242011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_02242011.pdf\n\n420111005_NOPV PCP PCO_02242011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_02242011_text.pdf\n\n420111005_Operator Response to Amended NOPV PCP PCO_05192011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420111005/420111005_Operator%20Response%20to%20Amended%20NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_05192011.pdf\n\n420111005_AMENDED NOPV PCP PCO_04192011.pdf\n\nU.S. Department 8701 South Gessner, Suite 1110\nof Transportation Houston, TX 77074\nPipeline a nd\nHazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration\nAMENDED NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nApril 19, 2011\nMr. Michel E. Nelson\nPresident\nOKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C.\n1 00 West Fifth Street\nTulsa, OK 74103-4298\nCPF 4-2011-1005\nDear Mr. Nelson :\nOn February 24, 2011, OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. was issued a Notice of Probable\nViolation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Com'pliance Order (Notice). In your response\ndated March 24, 2011, you explained that the regulation cited in Item 2 of the Notice may not\napply to the listed devices because they are not pressure relieving, but pressure\nlimiting/regulating devices. This Amended Notice is issued for the purpose of correcting the\nregulatory citation in Item 2.\nAs specified in the original Notice, on October 18-22, 2010, representatives of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United\nStates Code inspected your OKTEX Pipeline Company L.L.C.\n- EI Paso (OKTEX) system\nlocated in EI Paso, 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. §192.475 Internal corrosion control: General.\n\n\n\n(b) Whenever any pipe is removed from a pipeline for any reason, the internal\nsurface must be inspected for evidence of corrosion ....\nOKTEX failed to perform the required inspection for' the evidence of internal corrosion on a\nsection of pipe removed from service in April 2010.\nWhile performing pipeline patrols on March 3, 2010, OKTEX personnel discovered a Class 2\nleak in a section of 3-inch pipe located on the Norteno # 4 pipeline. During the repair of this\nleak, company personnel discovered a second corrosion leak nearby. As a result, OKTEX\nremoved a 12 foot section of the pipeline which included 3-inch and 4-inch pipe. The section of\npipeline was replaced with 12 feet of 4-inch Fusion Bonded Epoxy Steel pipe on April 7, 2010.\nThis replacement activity exposed the inside of the pipe and required that the internal surface\nbe inspected.\nDuring the records review, PHMSA inspectors inquired about an internal corrosion inspection\nrecord and learned that OKTEX personnel had not performed an internal inspection. Per\nOKTEX procedure 40.102A, the inspection should be recorded on the form entitled \"Pipeline\nInspection Program for Excavations.\" The Internal Corrosion section of the form has several\nstatements that require an answer. Each statement has a drop-down menu of possible choices:\n'I\\J/A, ' 'Yes, ' or 'No.' The statements have a default result of N/A that would mean the internal\nsurface of the pipe was not exposed and therefore not inspected. A 'Yes' answer means an\ninternal surface inspection was performed and evidence of corrosion was found. A 'No' answer\nmeans the inspection was performed and evidence of corrosion was not found. OKTEX\n\"performed an internal pipe surface inspection\" and updated the Internal Corrosion section of\nthe report on October 20, 2010. The inspection was performed using the coupon samples from\nthe stopple fittings.\n2. §192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and testing.\n(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs), and\npressure regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at intervals\nnot exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, to\ninspections and tests to determine that it is(2)\nAdequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for\nthe service in which it is employed;\nAt the time of the inspection, OKTEX had not determined if the pressure regulating stations\nhave sufficient capacity to provide reliable service. to the downstream facilities . OKTEX\npurchased the pipeline system in July 2006 from Norteno. OKTEX operates and provides the\noverpressure protection for the Norteno #4 and #5 pipeline systems which includes five\npressure regulating stations.\nThere are four pressure regulating facilities on Norteno # 4:\n1. Canutillo Delivery located at 6th & LA Mesa;\n2. Strahan located on Strahan and La Mesa;\n3. Gillette located on Gillette and La Mesa and\n4. Gato located on Gato Road and La Mesa.\n2\n\n\n\nThere is one pressure regulating facility on Norteno #5:\n1. Anthony City Gate located on West Washington.\nOKTEX is a subsidiary of the OI\\JEOK Partners and utilizes the ONEOK procedures. ONEOK\nprocedure 0 KSo p3. 160.1 02, section 3.11 states:\n\"Inspection and test pressure regulators to assure that each:\n3.11 .2 Is adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the\nservice intended.\"\nSection 6.3 states:\n\"Use forms OKSops3.160.1 02A Regulator Inspection and Testing ... \"\nDuring the inspection, PHMSA noted that OKTEX did not use the forms as specified in the\nprocedure. Instead, OKTEX provided excel spread sheet documents for pressure regulator\ninspections. During discussions with company personnel it was noted that OKTEX had not\nconfirmed or determined the required capacity for the pipeline system pressure regulating\nstations when it was acquired from Norteno. While it appears that annual checks are made it\ncannot be determined if these results indicate adequate capacity since the original capacity was\nnot determined.\n3. §192.805 Qualification program.\nEach operator shall have and follow a written qualification program. The\nprogram shall include provisions to:\n(b) Ensure through evaluation that individuals performing covered tasks are\nqualified;\nOn December 7, 2006, OKTEX failed to ensure through evaluation that a Company inspector\nwas qualified to perform the covered task 831-0811 : Visual Inspection of Welding and Welds.\nAn individual conducted the visual inspection of all welds for the reconstruction of an existing 4inch\nrailroad crossing on the Norteno # 5 pipeline located in Anthony, TX and was not qualified\nunder 831-0811.\nThe 'Scope of Work' for the reconstruction project, section l\\Jon-Destructive Testing, page 2,\nstates:\n\"All welds will be 100% visually inspected by the Company Inspector. Tie-in welds will\nbe visually inspected and leak (soap bubble or flame pack) tested\".\nTo comply with the Scope of Work and meet the requirements of §192.241 and §192.805 (b), a\nnon-welder must be qualified to perform the task. The OKTEX Operator Qualification program\nrequires that an individual be qualified for covered task 831-0811 to perform visual weld\ninspection. PHMSA reviewed the qualification records for this individual and they indicate he\nhas never been qualified for this task.\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 $35,700.00 as follows:\n3\n\n\n\nItem number PENALTY\n2 $35,700.00\nWarning Items\nWith respect to items 1 and 3 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 item(s) . Be\nadvised that failure to do so may result in OKTEX being subject to additional enforcement\naction.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to item 2 pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to OKTEX. Please refer\nto the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a part of this Notice.\nResponse to this Notice\nIn accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207(c), you have the opportunity to respond to this\nAmended Notice. Enclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for\nPipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the\nresponse options. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement\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). If you\nchoose not to respond within 30 days of receipt of this Amended Notice, the Associate\nAdministrator for Pipeline Safety will consider your letter dated March 24, 2011, to constitute\nyour response in this matter.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2011-1005 and for each document\nyou submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\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\n4\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 OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. a Compliance\nOrder incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of OKTEX\nwith the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. 2. 3. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to the failure to determine the\ncapacity of pressure regulating stations installed on OKTEX pipelines facilities,\nOKTEX must perform the required analysis and ensure that the pressure\nregulators have adequate capacity to provide reliable service to the downstream\nfacilities as required by 49 CFR §192.739. If the pressure regulator capacity is\nfound to be insufficient, OKTEX must install/modify the equipment to provide the\nrequired capacity.\nOKTEX must complete item 1 of the Compliance Order within 30 days following\nreceipt of the Final Order.\nIt is requested (not mandated) that OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. maintain\ndocumentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this\nCompliance Order and submit the total to R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest\nRegion, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration . It is requested\nthat these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost\nassociated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline\ni nfrastru cture.\n5\n\n420111005_AMENDED NOPV PCP PCO_ 04192011_text.pdf\n\nAMENDED NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nApril 19, 2011\nMr. Michel E. Nelson\nPresident\nOKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C.\n100 West Fifth Street\nTulsa, OK 74103-4298\nCPF 4-2011-1005\nDear Mr. Nelson:\nOn February 24, 2011, OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. was issued a Notice of Probable\nViolation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In your response\ndated March 24, 2011, you explained that the regulation cited in Item 2 of the Notice may not\napply to the listed devices because they are not pressure relieving, but pressure\nlimiting/regulating devices. This Amended Notice is issued for the purpose of correcting the\nregulatory citation in Item 2.\nAs specified in the original Notice, on October 18-22, 2010, representatives of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United\nStates Code inspected your OKTEX Pipeline Company L.L.C. – El Paso (OKTEX) system\nlocated in El Paso, 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. §192.475 Internal corrosion control: General.\n\n\n\n(b) Whenever any pipe is removed from a pipeline for any reason, the internal\nsurface must be inspected for evidence of corrosion….\nOKTEX failed to perform the required inspection for the evidence of internal corrosion on a\nsection of pipe removed from service in April 2010.\nWhile performing pipeline patrols on March 3, 2010, OKTEX personnel discovered a Class 2\nleak in a section of 3-inch pipe located on the Norteno # 4 pipeline. During the repair of this\nleak, company personnel discovered a second corrosion leak nearby. As a result, OKTEX\nremoved a 12 foot section of the pipeline which included 3-inch and 4-inch pipe. The section of\npipeline was replaced with 12 feet of 4-inch Fusion Bonded Epoxy Steel pipe on April 7, 2010.\nThis replacement activity exposed the inside of the pipe and required that the internal surface\nbe inspected.\nDuring the records review, PHMSA inspectors inquired about an internal corrosion inspection\nrecord and learned that OKTEX personnel had not performed an internal inspection. Per\nOKTEX procedure 40.102A, the inspection should be recorded on the form entitled “Pipeline\nInspection Program for Excavations.\n” The Internal Corrosion section of the form has several\nstatements that require an answer. Each statement has a drop-down menu of possible choices:\n‘N/A,’ ‘Yes,’ or ‘No.’ The statements have a default result of N/A that would mean the internal\nsurface of the pipe was not exposed and therefore not inspected. A ‘Yes’ answer means an\ninternal surface inspection was performed and evidence of corrosion was found. A ‘No’ answer\nmeans the inspection was performed and evidence of corrosion was not found. OKTEX\n“performed an internal pipe surface inspection” and updated the Internal Corrosion section of\nthe report on October 20, 2010. The inspection was performed using the coupon samples from\nthe stopple fittings.\n2. §192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and testing.\n(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs), and\npressure regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at intervals\nnot exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, to\ninspections and tests to determine that it is-\n(2) Adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for\nthe service in which it is employed;\nAt the time of the inspection, OKTEX had not determined if the pressure regulating stations\nhave sufficient capacity to provide reliable service to the downstream facilities. OKTEX\npurchased the pipeline system in July 2006 from Norteno. OKTEX operates and provides the\noverpressure protection for the Norteno #4 and #5 pipeline systems which includes five\npressure regulating stations.\nThere are four pressure regulating facilities on Norteno # 4:\n1. Canutillo Delivery located at 6th & LA Mesa;\n2. Strahan located on Strahan and La Mesa;\n3. Gillette located on Gillette and La Mesa and\n4. Gato located on Gato Road and La Mesa.\n2\n\n\n\nThere is one pressure regulating facility on Norteno #5:\n1. Anthony City Gate located on West Washington.\nOKTEX is a subsidiary of the ONEOK Partners and utilizes the ONEOK procedures. ONEOK\nprocedure OKSop3.160.102, section 3.11 states:\n“Inspection and test pressure regulators to assure that each:\n3.11.2 Is adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the\nservice intended.”\nSection 6.3 states:\n“Use forms OKSops3.160.102A Regulator Inspection and Testing…\n”\nDuring the inspection, PHMSA noted that OKTEX did not use the forms as specified in the\nprocedure. Instead, OKTEX provided excel spread sheet documents for pressure regulator\ninspections. During discussions with company personnel it was noted that OKTEX had not\nconfirmed or determined the required capacity for the pipeline system pressure regulating\nstations when it was acquired from Norteno. While it appears that annual checks are made it\ncannot be determined if these results indicate adequate capacity since the original capacity was\nnot determined.\n3. §192.805 Qualification program.\nEach operator shall have and follow a written qualification program. The\nprogram shall include provisions to:\n(b) Ensure through evaluation that individuals performing covered tasks are\nqualified;\nOn December 7, 2006, OKTEX failed to ensure through evaluation that a Company inspector\nwas qualified to perform the covered task B31-0811: Visual Inspection of Welding and Welds.\nAn individual conducted the visual inspection of all welds for the reconstruction of an existing 4-\ninch railroad crossing on the Norteno # 5 pipeline located in Anthony, TX and was not qualified\nunder B31-0811.\nThe ‘Scope of Work’ for the reconstruction project, section Non-Destructive Testing, page 2,\nstates:\n“All welds will be 100% visually inspected by the Company Inspector. Tie-in welds will\nbe visually inspected and leak (soap bubble or flame pack) tested”.\nTo comply with the Scope of Work and meet the requirements of §192.241 and §192.805 (b), a\nnon-welder must be qualified to perform the task. The OKTEX Operator Qualification program\nrequires that an individual be qualified for covered task B31-0811 to perform visual weld\ninspection. PHMSA reviewed the qualification records for this individual and they indicate he\nhas never been qualified for this task.\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 $35,700.00 as follows:3\n\n\n\nItem number PENALTY\n2 $35,700.00\nWarning Items\nWith respect to items 1 and 3 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 item(s). Be\nadvised that failure to do so may result in OKTEX being subject to additional enforcement\naction.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to item 2 pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to OKTEX. Please refer\nto the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a part of this Notice.\nResponse to this Notice\nIn accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207(c), you have the opportunity to respond to this\nAmended Notice. Enclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for\nPipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the\nresponse options. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement\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). If you\nchoose not to respond within 30 days of receipt of this Amended Notice, the Associate\nAdministrator for Pipeline Safety will consider your letter dated March 24, 2011, to constitute\nyour response in this matter.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2011-1005 and for each document\nyou submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\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\n4\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 OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. a Compliance\nOrder incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of OKTEX\nwith the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to the failure to determine the\ncapacity of pressure regulating stations installed on OKTEX pipelines facilities,\nOKTEX must perform the required analysis and ensure that the pressure\nregulators have adequate capacity to provide reliable service to the downstream\nfacilities as required by 49 CFR §192.739. If the pressure regulator capacity is\nfound to be insufficient, OKTEX must install/modify the equipment to provide the\nrequired capacity.\n2. OKTEX must complete item 1 of the Compliance Order within 30 days following\nreceipt of the Final Order.\n3. It is requested (not mandated) that OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. maintain\ndocumentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this\nCompliance Order and submit the total to R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest\nRegion, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested\nthat these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost\nassociated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline\ninfrastructure.\n5\n\n420111005_NOPV PCP PCO_02242011_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nFebruary 24, 2011\nMr. Michel E. Nelson\nPresident\nOKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C.\n100 West Fifth Street\nTulsa, OK 74103-4298\nCPF 4-2011-1005\nDear Mr. Nelson:\nOn October 18-22, 2010, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code inspected your\nOKTEX Pipeline Company L.L.C. – El Paso (OKTEX) system located in El Paso, 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. §192.475 Internal corrosion control: General.\n(b) Whenever any pipe is removed from a pipeline for any reason, the internal\nsurface must be inspected for evidence of corrosion….\nOKTEX failed to perform the required inspection for the evidence of internal corrosion on a\nsection of pipe removed from service in April 2010.\n\n\n\nWhile performing pipeline patrols on March 3, 2010, OKTEX personnel discovered a Class 2\nleak in a section of 3-inch pipe located on the Norteno # 4 pipeline. During the repair of this\nleak, company personnel discovered a second corrosion leak nearby. As a result, OKTEX\nremoved a 12 foot section of the pipeline which included 3-inch and 4-inch pipe. The section of\npipeline was replaced with 12 feet of 4-inch Fusion Bonded Epoxy Steel pipe on April 7, 2010.\nThis replacement activity exposed the inside of the pipe and required that the internal surface\nbe inspected.\nDuring the records review, PHMSA inspectors inquired about an internal corrosion inspection\nrecord and learned that OKTEX personnel had not performed an internal inspection. Per\nOKTEX procedure 40.102A, the inspection should be recorded on the form entitled “Pipeline\nInspection Program for Excavations.\n” The Internal Corrosion section of the form has several\nstatements that require an answer. Each statement has a drop-down menu of possible choices:\n‘N/A,’ ‘Yes,’ or ‘No.’ The statements have a default result of N/A that would mean the internal\nsurface of the pipe was not exposed and therefore not inspected. A ‘Yes’ answer means an\ninternal surface inspection was performed and evidence of corrosion was found. A ‘No’ answer\nmeans the inspection was performed and evidence of corrosion was not found. OKTEX\n“performed an internal pipe surface inspection” and updated the Internal Corrosion section of\nthe report on October 20, 2010. The inspection was performed using the coupon samples from\nthe stopple fittings.\n2. §192.743 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Capacity of relief devices.\n(a) Pressure relief devices at pressure limiting stations and pressure\nregulating stations must have sufficient capacity to protect the facilities to\nwhich they are connected. Except as provided in §192.739(b), the capacity\nmust be consistent with the pressure limits of §192.201(a). This capacity\nmust be determined at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once\neach calendar year, by testing the devices in place or by review and\ncalculations\nAt the time of the inspection, OKTEX had not determined that the relief devices have sufficient\ncapacity to protect the facilities to which they are connected. OKTEX purchased the pipeline\nsystem in July 2006 from Norteno. OKTEX operates and provides the overpressure protection\nfor the Norteno #4 and #5 pipeline systems which includes five relief devices.\nThere are four devices on Norteno # 4:\n1. Canutillo Delivery located at 6th & LA Mesa;\n2. Strahan located on Strahan and La Mesa;\n3. Gillette located on Gillette and La Mesa and\n4. Gato located on Gato Road and La Mesa.\nThere is one device on Norteno #5:\n1. Anthony City Gate located on West Washington.\nOKTEX is a subsidiary of the ONEOK Partners and utilizes the ONEOK procedures. ONEOK\nprocedure OKSop3.160.102, section 3.10 states:\n2\n\n\n\n“Calculate the required capacity, or review a previous calculation, of each relief device.\nCompare the required capacity to the rated capacity of the device. Review all\napplicable parameters to ensure new calculations or past calculations are valid. …”\nSection 6.1 states:\n“Keep relief device capacity calculations done manually for the life of the particular\nrelief situation. Keep verifications of previous calculations until the subsequent year’s\nconfirmation is competed.”\nSection 6.3 states:\n“Use forms OKSops3.160.102A Regulator Inspection and Testing and\nOKSops3.1002B Relief Valve Inspection and Testing”\nDuring the inspection, PHMSA noted that OKTEX did not use the forms as specified in the\nprocedure. Instead, OKTEX provided excel spread sheet documents for relief device\ninspections. During discussions with company personnel it was noted that OKTEX had not\nconfirmed or determined the required capacity for the pipeline system relief devices when it was\nacquired from Norteno. While it appears that annual checks are made it cannot be determined\nif these results indicate adequate capacity since the original capacity was not determined.\n3. §192.805 Qualification program.\nEach operator shall have and follow a written qualification program. The\nprogram shall include provisions to:\n(b) Ensure through evaluation that individuals performing covered tasks are\nqualified;\nOn December 7, 2006, OKTEX failed to ensure through evaluation that a Company inspector\nwas qualified to perform the covered task B31-0811: Visual Inspection of Welding and Welds.\nAn individual conducted the visual inspection of all welds for the reconstruction of an existing 4-\ninch railroad crossing on the Norteno # 5 pipeline located in Anthony, TX and was not qualified\nunder B31-0811.\nThe ‘Scope of Work’ for the reconstruction project, section Non-Destructive Testing, page 2,\nstates:\n“All welds will be 100% visually inspected by the Company Inspector. Tie-in welds will\nbe visually inspected and leak (soap bubble or flame pack) tested”.\nTo comply with the Scope of Work and meet the requirements of §192.241 and §192.805 (b), a\nnon-welder must be qualified to perform the task. The OKTEX Operator Qualification program\nrequires that an individual be qualified for covered task B31-0811 to perform visual weld\ninspection. PHMSA reviewed the qualification records for this individual and they indicate he\nhas never been qualified for this task.\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 $35,700.00 as follows:\n3\n\n\n\nItem number PENALTY\n2 $35,700.00\nWarning Items\nWith respect to items 1 and 3 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 item(s). Be\nadvised that failure to do so may result in OKTEX being subject to additional enforcement\naction.\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to item 2 pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to OKTEX. Please refer\nto the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed 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 4-2011-1005 and for each document\nyou submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\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\n4\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 OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. a Compliance\nOrder incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of OKTEX\nwith the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to the failure to determine the\ncapacity of relief devices installed on OKTEX pipelines facilities, OKTEX must\nperform the required analysis and ensure that the relief devices have adequate\ncapacity to protect the facilities as required by 49 CFR §192.743. If the relief\ncapacity is found to be insufficient, OKTEX must install/modify the equipment to\nprovide the required capacity.\n2. OKTEX must complete item 1 of the Compliance Order within 30 days following\nreceipt of the Final Order.\n3. It is requested (not mandated) that OKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C. maintain\ndocumentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this\nCompliance Order and submit the total to R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest\nRegion, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested\nthat these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost\nassociated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline\ninfrastructure.\n5\n\n420111005_Final Order_12142011_text.pdf\n\nDEC 1 4 2011\nMr. Michel E. Nelson\nSenior Vice President\nOKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C.\n100 West Fifth Street\nTulsa, OK 74103-4298\nRe: CPF No. 4-2011-1005\nDear Mr. Nelson:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $35,700. It further finds that OKTEX Pipeline Company\nL.L.C. has completed the actions specified in the Notice to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. When the civil penalty has been paid, this enforcement action will be closed.\nService of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as\notherwise 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. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, Pipeline\nSafety, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [71791000164202982368]\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)\nOKTEX Pipeline Company, L.L.C., ) CPF No. 4-2011-1005\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom October 18-22, 2010, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),\nconducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of OKTEX Pipeline\nCompany, L.L.C. (OKTEX or Respondent) in El Paso, Texas. OKTEX is an interstate pipeline\ncompany owned and operated by ONEOK Partners, L.P., with interconnects in Oklahoma, New\nMexico and Texas.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated April 19, 2011, an Amended2\nNotice of Probable Violation,\nProposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that OKTEX violated 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.739(a)(2) and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $35,700 for the alleged violation. The\nNotice also proposed ordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged\nviolation. The warning items required no further action, but advised the operator that it may be\nsubject to future enforcement action, if OPS finds violation of these provisions in subsequent\ninspections.\nOKTEX responded to the Amended Notice by letter dated March 24, 2011 (Second Response).\nThe company did not contest the allegation of violation, but provided an explanation of its\nactions, requested that the proposed civil penalty be reduced or eliminated, and provided\n1 http://www.oneokpartners.com/Investor/FinancialInformation/SECFilings.aspx accessed November 2, 2011.\n2 PHMSA issued the first NOPV related to this matter on February 24, 2011. On March 24, 2011, OKTEX’s First\nResponse noted that Item 2 of the NOPV cited to §192.743, which does not require capacity calculations and\ncomparison. OKTEX stated that no pressure relief devices exist at the five pressure regulating stations cited in the\nItem 2 of the February 24, 2011 NOPV. PHMSA responded with an Amended NOPV that replaced the Item 2\nviolation for §192.743 with a new Item 2 for violation of §192.739. The Second Amended NOPV was considered in\nthe preparation of this Final Order. Both Respondent’s February 24, 2011 and May 19, 2011 Responses were\nconsidered.\n\n\n\n2\nevidence that it took all actions required by the Proposed Compliance Order. Respondent did not\nrequest a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Second Response, OKTEX did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated\n49 C.F.R. Part 192, as follows:\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a)(2), which states:\n§ 192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and testing.\n(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs), and pressure\nregulating station and its equipment must be subjected at intervals not exceeding 15\nmonths, but at least once each calendar year, to inspections and tests to determine that it\nis—\n(1) . . .\n(2) Adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the\nservice in which it is employed;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a)(2) by failing to determine\nthat its pressure regulating stations were adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability\nof operation for the service in which they were employed. Specifically, the Notice alleged that\nOKTEX did not perform initial capacity calculations on five pressure limiting devices so that it\ncould determine whether its devices were adequate, as to capacity or reliability. The Notice also\nalleged that OKTEX failed to use the forms specified by its Operating Procedure for the\ncalculation of the required capacity for these pressure limiting devices.\nIn its Second Response, OKTEX acknowledged that “copies of the calculations and comparisons\nfirm delivery volumes are assigned to its downstream meters, further complicating the required\nanalysis. Therefore, in order to measure required versus actual capacity, OKTEX reviewed 39\nmonths of historical delivery totals and arrived at the conclusion that sufficient capacity exists\ndone by the previous operator have not been located.”3 In addition, the Respondent noted that no\nfor these relief devices to protect the facilities to which they are connected.\nHowever, at the time of the inspection, Respondent had not performed this analysis. Therefore,\nwhile OKTEX performed required inspections and testing at the intervals required by\n§ 192.739(a), no reliable baseline was established as a comparison point. Therefore, Respondent\ncould not determine adequacy of capacity and operation for these relief devices and therefore\nwas not in compliance with § 192.739(a)(2).\nI will consider OKTEX’s request for elimination or modification of the proposed penalty i","truncated":true,"body_characters":47385}