# MAGELLAN PIPELINE COMPANY, LP — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 420125014
- **title:** MAGELLAN PIPELINE COMPANY, LP — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2012-04-17
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(a), 195.428(d), 195.432(b), 195.579(a), 195.581.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420125014.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420125014.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420125014
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420125014
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving MAGELLAN PIPELINE COMPANY, LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(a),  195.428(d),  195.432(b),  195.579(a),  195.581. The case was opened on 2012-04-17 and is reported as closed as of 2014-03-20. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

420125014_Closure_ 03202014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420125014/420125014_Closure_%2003202014_text.pdf

420125014_Closure_03202014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420125014/420125014_Closure_03202014.pdf

420125014_Final Order_06212013.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420125014/420125014_Final%20Order_06212013.pdf

420125014_Final Order_06212013_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420125014/420125014_Final%20Order_06212013_text.pdf

420125014_NOPV PCO_04172012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420125014/420125014_NOPV%20PCO_04172012.pdf

420125014_NOPV PCO_04172012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420125014/420125014_NOPV%20PCO_04172012_text.pdf

420125014_Closure_ 03202014_text.pdf

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
March 20, 2014
Mr. Michael N. Mears
President and Chief Executive Officer
Magellan Pipeline Company, LP
1 Williams Center
P.O. Box 22186
Tulsa, OK 74172
CPF 4-2012-5014
Dear Mr. Mears:
In May 2011, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code were onsite and inspected the records and facilities
associated with the 18 inch and 12 inch products and 24/26 inch crude oil pipeline in and between Pasadena
and Texas City, TX. In June 2011, additional records were inspected at the Magellan office in Tulsa, OK.
A Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order was issued to Magellan Pipeline
Company, LP on April 17, 2012. The Final Order with Compliance Order was issued on June 21, 2013.
Magellan submitted documentation on August 26, 2013, of inspections, actions, training and amended
procedures. My staff reviewed the information provided, and it appears that the inadequacies outlined in
this Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order has been corrected.
This letter is to inform you that no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank you for
your cooperation.
Sincerely,
R. M. Seeley
Director, Southwest region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

420125014_Closure_03202014.pdf

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
8701 S. Gessner, Suite 1110
Houston, TX 77074
CERTIFIED MAIL- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
March 20, 2014
Mr. Michael N. Mears
President and Chief Executive Officer
Magellan Pipeline Company, LP
1 Williams Center
P.O. Box 22186
Tulsa, OK 74172
CPF 4-2012-5014
Dear Mr. Mears:
In May 2011, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code were onsite and inspected the records and facilities
associated with the 18 inch and 12 inch products and 24/26 inch crude oil pipeline in and between Pasadena
and Texas City, TX. In June 2011, additional records were inspected at the Magellan office in Tulsa, OK.
A Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order was issued to Magellan Pipeline
Company, LP on April17, 2012. The Final Order with Compliance Order was issued on June 21, 2013.
Magellan submitted documentation on August 26, 2013, of inspections, actions, training and amended
procedures. My staff reviewed the information provided, and it appears that the inadequacies outlined in
this Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order has been corrected.
This letter is to inform you that no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank you for
your cooperation.
Sincerely,
cf&;~
R. M. Seeley
Director, Southwest region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

420125014_Final Order_06212013_text.pdf

JUNE 21, 2013
Mr. Michael N. Mears
President and Chief Executive Officer
Magellan Pipeline Company, LP
1 Williams Center
P.O. Box 22186
Tulsa, OK 74172
Re: CPF No. 4-2012-5014
Dear Mr. Mears:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation and specifies actions that need to be taken by Magellan Pipeline Company, LP, to
comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been
completed, as determined by the Director, Southwest Region, this enforcement action will be
closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,
or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Rodrick M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, OPS
Mr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, OPS
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
Magellan Pipeline Company, LP, ) CPF No. 4-2012-5014
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
In May 2011, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-
site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and records of Magellan Pipeline Company, LP
(Magellan or Respondent), in Texas and Oklahoma. Magellan operates approximately
9,600 miles of refined products pipelines and 51 terminals in 13 Midwestern states.1
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated April 17, 2012, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed
finding that Magellan committed various violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and proposed ordering
Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations.
Magellan responded to the Notice by letters dated May 22, 2012 (First Response) and
May 23, 2012 (Second Response). In these responses, Magellan requested a 45-day extension to
file a response and a hearing, respectively. By letter dated August 14, 2012, Respondent
withdrew its request for a hearing and thereby authorized the entry of this Final Order without
further notice.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
In its correspondence, Magellan did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated
49 C.F.R. Part 195, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a), which states:
1 Magellan Midstream Partners, LP, Home Page, available tt http://www.magellanlp.com, (last accessed
January 11, 2013).



2
§ 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies.
(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each
pipeline system a manual of written procedures for conducting normal
operations and maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations
and emergencies. This manual shall be reviewed at intervals not
exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, and
appropriate changes made as necessary to insure that the manual is
effective. This manual shall be prepared before initial operations of a
pipeline system commence, and appropriate parts shall be kept at
locations where operations and maintenance activities are conducted.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its
manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that Magellan failed to follow its valve inspection procedures,
2
which required company personnel to verify the security of its valves. During the site
inspection, PHMSA inspectors discovered a completely unsecured valve site. The security gate
chain was corroded completely through and no fence, locked gate, or other apparatus was in
place to secure the site. While Magellan’s records indicated that valve inspections for the site
were conducted within the required intervals, the lack of proper security was not notated in the
relevant inspection records.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(a) by failing to follow its
manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d), which states:
§ 195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems.
(a) . . .
(d) After October 2, 2000, the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b)
of this section for inspection and testing of pressure control equipment
apply to the inspection and testing of overfill protection systems.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d) by failing to inspect and test
the overfill protection system that served as part of its pressure control equipment. Specifically,
the Notice alleged that Magellan failed to inspect or test the overfill protection systems of the in-
service atmospheric and low-pressure steel aboveground breakout tanks used on its pipeline.
Respondent utilizes tanks owned by other entities, at both the Kinder Morgan Pasadena Terminal
and the Texas City Refinery, to relieve surges from its pipelines. As a result, Magellan is
required to perform inspection and testing, as specified by § 195.428(d).
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation, but stated in its First Response and
Second Response that it intended to secure the relevant inspection records and submit them to
2 Magellan Mainline Valve Inspection Procedure, 7.13-ADM-1035-3.2.2. Pipeline Safety Violation Report
(Violation Report) (April 17, 2012) (on file with PHMSA), at 39.



3
OPS. In its August 14, 2012 hearing withdrawal request, Magellan indicated that it had secured
the agreement of the relevant operators to provide the necessary records. However, no records
have been received to date.
Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated
49 C.F.R. § 195.428(d) by failing to inspect and test the overfill protection system that served as
part of its pressure control equipment
Item 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.432(b), which states:
§ 195.432 Inspection of in-service breakout tanks.
(a) . . .
(b) Each operator must inspect the physical integrity of in-service
atmospheric and low-pressure steel aboveground breakout tanks according
to API Standard 653 (incorporated by reference, see 195.3). However, if
structural conditions prevent access to the tank bottom, the bottom
integrity may be assessed according to a plan included in the operations
and maintenance manual under § 195.402(c)(3).
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.432(b) by failing to inspect the
physical integrity of in-service atmospheric and low-pressure steel aboveground breakout tanks
according to API Standard 653 or, if prevented from accessing the tank bottom, assessing bottom
integrity according to a plan included in its operations and maintenance manual. Specifically,
the Notice alleged that Magellan failed to inspect breakout tanks associated with its pipeline.
During the OPS inspection, Magellan was unable to provide evidence that it had inspected or
maintained appropriate records for breakout tanks at the Kinder Morgan Pasadena Terminal and
the Texas City Refinery.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation, but indicated that the relevant inspection
and testing records would be provided. As of the date of the Final Order, no records have been
received.
Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated
49 C.F.R. § 195.432(b) by failing to inspect the physical integrity of in-service atmospheric and
low-pressure steel aboveground breakout tanks according to API Standard 653 or, if prevented
from accessing the tank bottom, assessing bottom integrity according to a plan included in its
operations and maintenance manual.
Item 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.579(a), which states:
§ 195.579 What must I do to mitigate internal corrosion?
(a) General. If you transport any hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide
that would corrode the pipeline, you must investigate the corrosive effect
of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide on the pipeline and take
adequate steps to mitigate internal corrosion.



4
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.579(a) by failing to investigate the
effect of the corrosive hazardous liquid being transported on its pipeline and to take adequate
steps to mitigate internal corrosion. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Magellan was unable to
provide documentation that it had performed an investigation of the liquid’s corrosive effects.
Magellan acquired the pipelines cited during the audit in November 2010 and, since that time,
has not taken adequate steps to mitigate internal corrosion. During the OPS inspection, Magellan
was allegedly unable to provide any documentation that it had performed a coupon examination,
water sampling, or any other corrosive-effect investigation.3
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.579(a) by failing to investigate
the effect of the corrosive hazardous liquid being transported on its pipeline and to take adequate
steps to mitigate internal corrosion.
These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement
action taken against Respondent.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.402(a), 195.428(d), 195.432(b) and 195.579(a), respectively.
Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids
or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety
standards established under chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and
49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Respondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance
with the pipeline safety regulations applicable to its operations:
1. With respect to the violation of § 195.402(a) (Item 1), Respondent must review all
applicable procedures related to valve inspections (7.13-ADM-1035). Respondent
must verify that all field personnel responsible for performing valve inspections are
properly trained in all inspection procedures and the completion of inspection records.
In addition, Respondent must inspect all mainline valves to ensure that adequate
security is in place, within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order.
2. With respect to the violation of § 195.428(d) (Items 2 and 3), Respondent must
implement a process either to inspect or provide inspection records of (1) the physical
integrity of in-service atmospheric and low-pressure steel aboveground breakout
tanks, according to section 4 of API Standard 653; and (2) the testing of overfill
protection systems, within 90 days of receipt of the Final Order.
4. With respect to the violation of § 195.579(a) (Item 4), Respondent must
investigate the potential corrosive effect of hazardous liquids being transported on its
pipeline and implement a program to monitor and mitigate internal corrosion, within
90 days of receipt of the Final Order.
3 Violation Report, at 21.



5
5. Respondent is requested but not required to submit documentation of the safety
improvement costs associated with fulfilling the Compliance Order and submit the
total to Director, Southwest Region. Costs should be reported in two categories: (1)
total cost associated with preparation and revision of plans, procedures, studies and
analyses; and (2) total cost associated with replacements, additions, and other changes
to the pipeline infrastructure.
The Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a
written request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an
extension.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
not to exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the
Attorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.
WARNING ITEM
With respect to Item 5, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195 but did not propose a
civil penalty or compliance order for this item. Therefore, this is considered to be warning
items. The warning was for:
49 C.F.R. § 195.481 (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to protect several
areas of its pipelines from atmospheric corrosion. PHMSA inspectors noted
several areas in which piping had paint damage, coating damage, and surface
corrosion.
Magellan presented no information in its Responses showing that it had taken certain actions to
address the cited item. If OPS finds a violation of this provision in a future inspection,
Respondent may be subject to possible enforcement action.
If OPS finds a violation of this provision in a future inspection, Respondent may be subject to
possible enforcement action.
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with
49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
___________________________________ __________________________
Jeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 17991