WEST TEXAS GULF PIPELINE CO — Notice of Probable Violation

party submissionOfficial PDF420155009_Operator Response to Notice_05082015.pdf#

420155009_Final Order_11032015_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFNovember 3, 2015 Mr. Robert Owens Chief Executive Officer Sunoco Pipeline, L.P. 1818 Market Street, Suite 1500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Re: CPF No. 4-2015-5009 Dear Mr. Owens: Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of violation and assesses a civil penalty of $141,000. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment of the full penalty amount, by wire transfer, dated May 7, 2015. This enforcement action is now 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. Rod M. Seeley, Region Director, Southwest Region, OPS Mr. David Chalson, Vice President, Operations, Sunoco Pipeline, L.P. CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED#

420155009_Final Order_11032015_text.pdf, page 2U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 ____________________________________ In the Matter of ) ) ) West Texas Gulf Pipeline Company, ) a subsidiary of Sunoco Pipeline, L.P. ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) ) CPF No. 4-2015-5009 FINAL ORDER On March 4, 2015, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), received an information request for an alleged accident on the West Texas Gulf Pipeline Company (WTG or Respondent) facility, OPID #22442. WTG owns a 580-mile long crude oil pipeline from Colorado City, Texas to Longview, Texas, and operates as a subsidiary of Sunoco Pipeline L.P. (Sunoco). The WTG facility at issue is located in Wortham, Texas. The alleged accident was described as having occurred while Sunoco and its contractors were performing pipeline modifications at the facility and resulted in a release of crude oil, ignition of the crude oil, and a serious injury requiring in- patient hospitalization, on or about February 19, 2013. After receiving the information request, PHMSA initiated an investigation into the alleged accident. As a result of the investigation, the Region Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent, by letter dated April 8, 2015, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed findings that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.52 and 195.54 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $141,000 for the alleged violations. Respondent responded to the Notice by letter dated May 8, 2015 (Response). The company did not contest the allegations of violation and paid the proposed civil penalty of $141,000, as provided in 49 C.F.R. § 190.227. Payment of the penalty serves to close the case with prejudice to Respondent. FINDINGS OF VIOLATION In its Response, Respondent did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part 195, as follows:#

420155009_Final Order_11032015_text.pdf, page 3CPF No. 4-2015-5009 Page 2 Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.52, which states in part: § 195.52 Immediate notice of certain accidents. (a) Notice requirements. At the earliest practicable moment following discovery of a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported…, the operator of the system must give notice, in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, of any failure that: (1) Caused a death or a personal injury requiring hospitalization; (2) Resulted in either a fire or explosion not intentionally set by the operator The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.52 by failing to provide notice at the earliest practicable moment following the discovery of the release of hazardous liquids at its facility in Wortham, Texas. Specifically, the Notice alleged that the National Response Center had no record of a report for the accident that occurred on or about February 19, 2013 at Respondent’s facility or any affiliated Sunoco facility. Additionally, PHMSA’s investigation revealed that Sunoco conducted an internal investigation of the accident but failed to provide notice to the National Response Center. 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. § 195.52 by failing to provide notice at the earliest practicable moment following the discovery of the release of hazardous liquids at its facility in Wortham, Texas. Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54, which states in part: § 195.54 Accident reports. (a) Each operator that experiences an accident that is required to be reported under § 195.50 must, as soon as practicable, but not later than 30 days after discovery of the accident, file an accident report on DOT Form 7000-1. § 195.50 Reporting accidents An accident report is required for each failure in a pipeline system subject to this part in which there is a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in any of the following: (a) Explosion or fire not intentionally set by the operator; (b) Release of 5 gallons or more of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide…; (c) Death of any person; (d) Personal injury necessitating hospitalization The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54 by failing to submit a written DOT Form 7000-1 for the accident in which there was a release of hazardous liquid resulting in an explosion and injury necessitating hospitalization. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54 because the Wortham facility accident involved both an ignition of crude oil and injury requiring hospitalization. Consequently, under § 195.54 the accident was required to be reported on DOT form 7000-1. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that#

420155009_Final Order_11032015_text.pdf, page 4CPF No. 4-2015-5009 Page 3 Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54 by failing to submit a written DOT Form 7000-1 for the accident that occurred on or about February 19, 2013 in its Wortham, Texas facility. These findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement action taken against Respondent. ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY Under 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed $200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any related series of violations.1 In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing business; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $141,000 for the violations cited above. Item 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $70,500 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R. §195.52, for failing to provide notice at the earliest practicable moment following the discovery of the release of hazardous liquids at its facility in Wortham, Texas. Respondent neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument justifying a reduction in the proposed penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $70,500 for violation of 49 C.F.R. §195.52. Item 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $70,500 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.54, for failing to submit a written DOT Form 7000-1 for an accident in which there was a release of hazardous liquid resulting in an explosion and injury necessitating hospitalization. Respondent neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument justifying a reduction in the proposed penalty. This probable violation is a repeat violation of CPF# 4-2010- 5010, Item 2. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $70,500 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.54. In summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the Items cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $141,000, which has already been paid in full. 1 The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, Pub. L. No. 112-90, § 2(a)(1), 125 Stat. 1904, January 3, 2012, increased the civil penalty liability for violating a pipeline safety standard to $200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any related series of violations.#

420155009_Final Order_11032015_text.pdf, page 5CPF No. 4-2015-5009 Page 4 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#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO 04082015_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY and PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED April 8, 2015 Mr. David Chalson Vice President, Operations Sunoco Pipeline, L. P. 1818 Market Street, Suite 1500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 CPF 4-2015-5009 Dear Mr. Chalson: On March 4, 2015, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration (PHMSA), Southwest Region Office of Pipeline Safety (SW Region, OPS) received an information request for an alleged event on the West Texas Gulf Pipeline Company, OPID #22442, which is operated by Sunoco Logistics Partners, L. P. (Sunoco). The alleged accident was described as having occurred while Sunoco and its contractors were performing pipeline modifications at the Wortham facility and having resulted in a release of crude oil, ignition of the crude oil, and a serious injury requiring in-patient hospitalization, on or about February 19, 2013. PHMSA, SW Region initiated an investigation into the alleged accident. As a result of the investigation, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the probable violations are:#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO 04082015_text.pdf, page 21. §195.52 Immediate notice of certain accidents. (a) Notice requirements. At the earliest practicable moment following discovery of a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in an event described in §195.50, the operator of the system must give notice, in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, of any failure that: (1) Caused a death or a personal injury requiring hospitalization; (2) Resulted in either a fire or explosion not intentionally set by the operator; Sunoco failed to provide immediate notice of an accident that occurred on February 19, 2013 on its West Texas Gulf Pipeline at its facility in Wortham, Texas. The accident involved a release of crude oil, ignition of the crude oil, and an injury requiring in-patient hospitalization. The National Response Center has no record of a report for the accident on or about February 19, 2013 for the Wortham, TX, West Texas Gulf Pipeline or any affiliated Sunoco entities. This probable violation is a repeat violation of CPF# 4-2010-5010, Item 1. 2. §195.54 Accident Reports. (a) Each operator that experiences an accident that is required to be reported under §195.50 must, as soon as practicable, but not later than 30 days after discovery of the accident, file an accident report on DOT Form 7000-1. §195.50 Reporting accidents. An accident report is required for each failure in a pipeline system subject to this part in which there is a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in any of the following: (a) Explosion or fire not intentionally set by the operator…. (d) Personal injury necessitating hospitalization; Sunoco failed to submit a written DOT Form 7000-1 for an accident that occurred on February 19, 2013, on its West Texas Gulf Pipeline at its Wortham facility in which a release of crude oil involved an ignition of product and an injury requiring in-patient hospitalization. This probable violation is a repeat violation of CPF# 4-2010-5010, Item 2. Proposed Civil Penalty Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $200,000 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for a related series of 2#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO 04082015_text.pdf, page 3violations. For violations occurring prior to January 4, 2012, the maximum penalty may not exceed $100,000 per violation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $1,000,000 for a related series of violations. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the circumstances and supporting documentation involved in the above probable violation(s) and has recommended that you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $141,000 as follows: Item number PENALTY 1 $ 70,500 2 $ 70,500 Proposed Compliance Order With respect to Item 2, pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, PHMSA proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Sunoco. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a part of this Notice. Response to this Notice Enclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. All material you submit in response to this enforcement action may be made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days of receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order. In your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2015-5009 and for each document you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible. Sincerely, R. M. Seeley Director, Southwest Region Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration cc via e-mail: TGNardozzi@SunocoLogistics.com, LEJensen@SunocoLogistics.com Enclosures: Proposed Compliance Order Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings 3#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO 04082015_text.pdf, page 4PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER Pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Sunoco Logistics Partners, L. P. (Sunoco) a Compliance Order incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of Sunoco with the pipeline safety regulations: 1. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to Sunoco’s failure to submit DOT Form 7000-1 for the accident that occurred on or about February 19, 2013, Sunoco shall submit Form 7000-1 within 10 calendar days of the issuance of this Final Order. Additionally, Sunoco shall provide to PHMSA any incident investigation report(s) completed by Sunoco, and identify any corrective action(s) taken to date to prevent recurrence of a similar event. 2. It is requested (not mandated) that Sunoco maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested that these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure. 4#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO_04082015.pdf, page 1Official PDFu.s. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 8701 South Gessner, Suite 111 0 Houston, TX 77074 NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY and PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER CERTIFIED MAIL -RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED April 8, 2015 Mr. David Chalson Vice President, Operations Sunoco Pipeline, L. P. 1818 Market Street, Suite 1500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 CPF 4-2015-5009 Dear Mr. Chalson: On March 4, 2015, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration (PHMSA), Southwest Region Office of Pipeline Safety (SW Region, OPS) received an information request for an alleged event on the West Texas Gulf Pipeline Company, OPID #22442, which is operated by Sunoco Logistics Partners, L. P. (Sunoco ). The alleged accident was described as having occurred while Sunoco and its contractors were performing pipeline modifications at the Wortham facility and having resulted in a release of crude oil, ignition of the crude oil, and a serious injury requiring in-patient hospitalization, on or about February 19, 2013. PHMSA, SW Region initiated an investigation into the alleged accident. As a result of the investigation, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the probable violations are:#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO_04082015.pdf, page 21. §195.52 Immediate notice of certain accidents. (a) Notice requirements. At the earliest practicable moment following discovery of a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in an event described in §195.50, the operator of the system must give notice, in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, of any failure that: (1) Caused a death or a personal injury requiring hospitalization; (2) Resulted in either a fit·e or explosion not intentionally set by the operator; Sunoco failed to provide immediate notice of an accident that occurred on February 19, 2013 on its West Texas Gulf Pipeline at its facility in Wortham, Texas. The accident involved a release of crude oil, ignition of the crude oil, and an injury requiring in-patient hospitalization. The National Response Center has no record of a report for the accident on or about February 19, 2013 for the Wortham, TX, West Texas Gulf Pipeline or any affiliated Sunoco entities. This probable violation is a repeat violation of CPF# 4-2010-5010, Item 1. 2. §195.54 Accident Reports. (a) Each operator that experiences an accident that is required to be reported under §195.50 must, as soon as practicable, but not later than 30 days after discovery of the accident, file an accident report on DOT Form 7000-1. §195.50 Reporting accidents. An accident report is required for each failure in a pipeline system subject to this part in which there is a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in any of the following: (a) Explosion or fire not intentionally set by the operator .... (d) Personal injury necessitating hospitalization; Sunoco failed to submit a written DOT Form 7000-1 for an accident that occurred on February 19, 2013, on its West Texas Gulf Pipeline at its Wortham facility in which a release of crude oil involved an ignition of product and an injury requiring in-patient hospitalization. This probable violation is a repeat violation of CPF# 4-2010-5010, Item 2. Proposed Civil Penalty Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $200,000 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for a related series of 2#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO_04082015.pdf, page 3violations. For violations occurring prior to January 4, 2012, the maximum penalty may not exceed $100,000 per violation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $1,000,000 for a related series of violations. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the circumstances and supporting documentation involved in the above probable violation(s) and has recommended that you be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $141,000 as follows: Item number 1 2 PENALTY $70,500 $70,500 Proposed Compliance Order With respect to Item 2, pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, PHMSA proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Sunoco. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made a part of this Notice. Response to this Notice Enclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. All material you submit in response to this enforcement action may be made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U .S.C. 552(b ), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days of receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this Notice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in this Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order. In your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2015-5009 and for each document you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible. Sincerely, ~4 R. M. Seeley Director, Southwest Region Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration cc via e-mail: TGNardozzi@SunocoLogistics.com, LEJensen@SunocoLogistics.com Enclosures: Proposed Compliance Order Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings 3#

420155009_NOPV PCP PCO_04082015.pdf, page 4PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER Pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Sunoco Logistics Partners, L. P. (Sunoco) a Compliance Order incorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of Sunoco with the pipeline safety regulations: 1. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to Sunoco's fai lure to submit DOT Form 7000-1 for the accident that occurred on or about February 19, 2013, Sunoco shall submit Form 7000-1 within 10 calendar days of the issuance of this Final Order. Additionally, Sunoco shall provide to PHMSA any incident investigation report(s) completed by Sunoco, and identify any corrective action(s) taken to date to prevent recurrence of a similar event. 2. It is requested (not mandated) that Sunoco maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to R. M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. It is requested that these costs be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure. 4#