# ROCKY MOUNTAIN PIPELINE SYSTEM, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 520035015
- **title:** ROCKY MOUNTAIN PIPELINE SYSTEM, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2003-06-04
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.401.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520035015.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520035015.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520035015
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520035015
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving ROCKY MOUNTAIN PIPELINE SYSTEM, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 195.401. The case was opened on 2003-06-04 and is reported as closed as of 2005-03-14. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520035015_final order_12232004.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520035015/520035015_final%20order_12232004.pdf

520035015_final order_12232004_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520035015/520035015_final%20order_12232004_text.pdf

520035015_withdrawal of notice letter_03142005.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520035015/520035015_withdrawal%20of%20notice%20letter_03142005.pdf

520035015_withdrawal of notice letter_03142005_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520035015/520035015_withdrawal%20of%20notice%20letter_03142005_text.pdf

cpf_5_2003_5015.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520035015/cpf_5_2003_5015.pdf

520035015_withdrawal of notice letter_03142005_text.pdf

O
U. S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
z, „t &"-""~ rtate ~z. (
o CoiTipjjgp(~ p„
Western Region Office of Pipehne Safety 12300 W Dakota Ave.
Lakewood, CO 80228
tf:110
,
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED
March 14, 2005
Mr. Tom McCormick
Manager of HSAE
Rocky Mountain Pipeline System LLC
555 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2400
Denver, CO 80202
Re: CPF No. 5-2003-5015
Dear Mr. McCormick:
On June 4, 2003, the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) issued to Rocky Mountain Pipeline System
LLC a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). Based on a
review of the documentation you have provided, it has been determined that you were not
responsible for the assets in question at the time the events described in the Notice occurred.
Accordingly, this case is being withdrawn and no further enforcement action is contemplated
with respect to the matters involved in this case.
Sincerely,
Chris Hoidal
Director, Western Region
Office of Pipeline Safety
cc: Compliance Registry (3)
DPS-28 (W. Nguyen)

520035015_final order_12232004_text.pdf

US Department
of Transportatton
Research and
Special Programs
Administration
400 Seventh Street, S W
Washington D C 20590
Mr. Jesse "Bud" Metcalf
Vice President of Operations & Technical Services
Rocky Mountain Pipeline System
P. O. Box 6209
Santa Maria, CA 93456
RE: CPF No. 5-2003-5015
Dear Mr. Metcalf:
Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipehne Safety in the
above-referenced case. It withdraws the allegation of violation. This enforcement action is closed.
Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C. F. R. ) 190. 5.
Sincerely,
James Reynolds
Pipeline Compliance Registry
Office of Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Tom McCormick, Manager of HS k E, Rocky Mountain Pipehne System
Mr. Colin G. Harris, Counsel for Rocky Mountain Pipeline System
Mr. Chris Hoidal, Director Western Region
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
In the Matter of
ROCKY MOUNTAIN PIPELINE SYSTEM, Respondent.
CPF No. 5-2003-5015
FINAL ORDER
During April 24, 2003 and May 7, 2003, pursuant to 49 U. S. C. g 60117, a representative of the
Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) conducted an investigation of a March 21, 2003 leak that occurred
on the Ft. Laramie to Palmer Junction segment of Respondent's 8-inch pipeline near Douglas, WY.
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS, issued to Respondent, by letter
dated June 4, 2003, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In
accordance with 49 C. F. R. $ 190. 207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent had violated
49 C. F. R. )195. 401 and proposed that Respondent take certain measures to correct the alleged
violations.
In a letter dated July 3, 2003, Respondent requested and was granted a forty-five day extension of
time to respond to the Notice, as Respondent was awaiting a preliminary report on an internal
inspection conducted prior to issuance of the Notice. Respondent responded to the Notice by letter
dated August 20, 2003 (Response). Respondent contested the allegations of violation, submitted
information concerning the corrective actions it has taken, offered information in explanation of the
allegations, and requested a hearing. The hearing was held on March 25, 2004 in Lakewood, CO.
On April 26, 2004, Respondent submitted a post hearing brief with additional evidence.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C. F. R. $192 401(b) by failing to correct within a
reasonable amount of time a condition that could adversely affect the safe operation of the pipeline
system. In August 2000, at mile post (MP) 16. 45, the bare, unprotected portion of the Ft. Laramie
to Palmer Junction pipeline segment experienced a corrosion related product release. At the time
of the release the pipeline was owned and operated by BP Amoco. In March 2002, Respondent
purchased the pipeline from BP Amoco. Another leak, also attributed to corrosion, occurred on July
5, 2002, at MP 28. 51 on the Ft. Laramie to Palmer Junction segment of Respondent's 8-inch pipeline.
On March 21, 2003, a third leak occurred at MP 16. 469 on the Ft. Laramie to Palmer Junction
segment.



The Notice alleged that Respondent did not take the appropriate steps to correct the aggressive
corrosion conditions that led to the first release within a reasonable amount of time. The Notice
alleged that active ongoing corrosion was demonstrated by the leak history and numerous corrosion
repairs following reevaluation of previous in-line electronic inspection (ILI) data. Failure to address
the corrosion problem resulted in the same segment of pipeline experiencing three releases in a
thirty-nine month period.
In its Response and during and after the hearing, Respondent contested the alleged violation.
Respondent advised that it did not own the pipeline at the time of the August 2000 leak and that it
purchased the pipeline in March 2002 from BP Pipelines (North America) Inc.
and that under a
,
Transition Agreement, BP continued to operate several aspects of the pipeline.
Respondent stated that it conducted a thorough investigation after the July 2002 leak, and that on
July 9, 2002 it located and reviewed a 1998 "Flaw List"summarizing a 1997 Tuboscope ILI of the
pipehne. The ILI had been performed by BP so that it could identify anomahes that required repair
or maintenance. Respondent argued that during the ILI review it discovered that the pipeline flaws
that led to the August 2000 and the July 2002 releases were described in the report but that neither
had been investigated nor repaired by BP. Respondent advised that it then examined the ILI report,
investigated all pipeline locations that showed anomalies of 30% or greater wall loss, and made a
determination that none was integrity threatening. Respondent took the position that it had a sound
pipeline.
During the hearing, Respondent argued that the March 2003 leak location, which is the subject of
the Notice, was not identified as an anomaly or called out for repair on the 1998 "Flaw List. "
Respondent's corrosion expert testified that there were no known conditions that could adversely
affect the safety of the pipeline, following the July 2002 leak. OPS did not disagree with any of the
Respondent's arguments or testimony. In its post hearing submission, Respondent argued that OPS
had the burden of proof and that it failed to rebut or counter Respondent's reports and expert' s
testimony at the hearing that the conditions leading to the March 2003 leak presented no risk to the
safety of the pipeline.
OPS' role is not to direct how an operator interprets data, as long as the data is interpreted by a
qualified person in a safety conscious, conservative manner always keeping the safety of the pubhc,
property and the environment first. Respondent submitted documentation that it acted within a
reasonable time to the July 2002 leak and that the March 2003 leak location, which is the subject of
the Notice, was not identified as an anomaly or called out for repair on the 1998 "Flaw List. "
Respondent also submitted documentation to show that it initiated and is committed to completion
of the tasks identified in the proposed compliance order and will submit the records and notice of
completed actions to the Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety.



OPS did not present any evidence contradicting Respondent's assertions. Therefore, this allegation
of violation is withdrawn and this case is closed.
DEC 23 Z04
Date Issued
Stacey Gerard
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 8930
