{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520085038","title":"PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2008-10-15","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.452(f)(4).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520085038.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520085038.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520085038","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520085038","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 195.452(f)(4). The case was opened on 2008-10-15 and is reported as closed as of 2011-02-28. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520085038_closure letter_02282011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520085038/520085038_closure%20letter_02282011.pdf\n\n520085038_closure letter_02282011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520085038/520085038_closure%20letter_02282011_text.pdf\n\n520085038_Final Order_05052009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520085038/520085038_Final%20Order_05052009.pdf\n\n520085038_Final Order_05052009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520085038/520085038_Final%20Order_05052009_text.pdf\n\n520085038_nopv pco_10152008_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520085038/520085038_nopv%20pco_10152008_text.pdf\n\n520085038_closure letter_02282011_text.pdf\n\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nFebruary 28, 2011\nMr. Todd L. Tulio\nManager, Regulatory Compliance\nConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company\nTN-5100\n600 North Dairy Ashford\nHouston, TX 77252-2197\nCPF 5-2008-5038\nDear Mr. Tulio:\nOn May 5, 2009, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued\nto ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company a Final Order in the above-referenced case. This Order\nincluded a Compliance Order. Based on our review of the documentation you provided, it has\nbeen determined that you have complied with the terms of this Order. The detail records\npertaining to your evaluation and remediation will be reviewed on the next IMP inspection.\nAccordingly, this case is now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to the\nmatters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nChris Hoidal\nDirector, Western Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry\nPHP-500 H. Nguyen (#121862)\n\n520085038_Final Order_05052009_text.pdf\n\nMay 5 2009\nMs. Margaret A. Yaege\nPresident\nConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company\n600 North Dairy Ashford\nHouston, TX 77079\nRe: CPF No. 5-2008-5038\nDear Ms. Yaege:\nEnclosed is the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of violation\nand specifies actions that ConocoPhillips needs to take to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been completed, as determined by the\nDirector, Western Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Your receipt of this Final\nOrder constitutes service of that document 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. Chris Hoidal, Director, Western Region, PHMSA\nMr. Todd Tullio, Director, Regulatory Compliance\nConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company\n1000 South Pine\nPonca City, OK 76602\nCERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7005 1160 0001 0046 9488]\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n___________________________________\nIn the Matter of )\nConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company, ) CPF No.5-2008-5038\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n___________________________________ )\nFINAL ORDER\nOn May 19–23 and June 2–5, 2008, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives of the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS), conducted an inspection of the Integrity Management Program (IMP) of ConocoPhillips\nPipe Line Company (ConocoPhillips or Respondent) at its offices in Ponca City, Oklahoma.\nConocoPhillips operates approximately 10,556 miles of DOT-regulated hazardous liquid\npipelines that transport crude oil, refined products, and highly volatile liquids. As a result of the\ninspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to ConocoPhillips, by letter\ndated October 15, 2008, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Compliance Order\n(Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that\nConocoPhillips had violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452 and proposed ordering ConocoPhillips to take\ncertain measures to correct the alleged violation.\nConocoPhillips responded to the Notice by letter dated November 18, 2008 (Response). The\ncompany did not contest the allegation of violation but requested a modification of the proposed\nCompliance Order. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to\none.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, ConocoPhillips did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49\nC.F.R. Part 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452, which states in\nrelevant part:\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n(f) What are the elements of an integrity management program? An integrity\nmanagement program begins with the initial framework. An operator must\ncontinually change the program to reflect operating experience, conclusions\ndrawn from results of the integrity assessments, and other maintenance and\n\n\n\n2\nsurveillance data, and evaluation of consequences of a failure on the high\nconsequence area. An operator must include, at minimum, each of the following\nelements in its written integrity management program:\n(1) . . .\n(4) Criteria for remedial actions to address integrity issues raised by the\nassessment methods and information analysis (see paragraph (h) of this section) .\n. . .\n(h) What actions must an operator take to address integrity issues?\n(1) General requirements. An operator must take prompt action to address all\nanomalous conditions the operator discovers through the integrity assessment or\ninformation analysis. In addressing all conditions, an operator must evaluate all\nanomalous conditions and remediate those that could reduce a pipeline’s integrity.\nAn operator must be able to demonstrate that the remediation of the condition will\nensure the condition is unlikely to pose a threat to the long-term integrity of the\npipeline. . . . .\n(2) . . .\n(4) Special requirements for scheduling remediation—\n(i) Immediate repair conditions . . .\n(iii) 180-day conditions. Except for conditions listed in paragraph (h)(4)(i) or\n(ii) of this section, an operator must schedule evaluation and remediation of the\nfollowing within 180 days of discovery of the condition:\n(A) A dent with a depth greater than 2% of the pipeline’s diameter (0.250\ninches in depth for a pipeline diameter less than NPS 12) that affects pipe\ncurvature at a girth weld or a longitudinal seam weld.\n(B) A dent located on the top of the pipeline (above 4 and 8 o’clock position)\nwith a depth greater than 2% of the pipeline’s diameter (0.250 inches in depth for\na pipeline diameter less than NPS 12).\n(C) A dent located on the bottom of the pipeline with a depth greater than 6%\nof the pipeline’s diameter.\n(D) A calculation of the remaining strength of the pipe shows an operating\npressure that is less than the current established maximum operating pressure at\nthe location of the anomaly. Suitable remaining strength calculation methods\ninclude, but are not limited to, ASME/ANSI B31G (“Manual for Determining the\nRemaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines” (1991)) or AGA Pipeline Research\nCommittee Project PR-3-805 (“A Modified Criterion for Evaluating the\nRemaining Strength of Corroded Pipe” (December 1989)). These documents are\nincorporated by reference and are available at the addresses listed in § 195.3.\n(E) An area of general corrosion with a predicted metal loss greater than 50%\nof nominal wall.\n(F) Predicted metal loss greater than 50% of nominal wall that is located at a\ncrossing of another pipeline, or is in an area with widespread circumferential\ncorrosion, or is in an area that could affect a girth weld.\n(G) A potential crack indication that when excavated is determined to be a crack.\n(H) Corrosion of or along a longitudinal seam weld.\n(I) A gouge or groove greater than 12.5% of nominal wall.\n\n\n\n3\nThe Notice alleged that ConocoPhillips violated § 195.452(h)(4)(iii) by failing to properly\nschedule the evaluation and remediation of certain anomalous conditions that must be remediated\nwithin 180 days of their discovery. Specifically, the Notice alleged that ConocoPhillips did not\nintegrate data showing the known longitudinal seam orientation of its pipeline with results it had\nobtained from in-line inspections (ILIs), a process that is necessary to identify potentially\ncorrosion might be serious enough to warrant remediation within 180 days, it is necessary to\nintegrate longitudinal seam orientation data with relevant ILI results. Respondent did not contest\nthis allegation and indicated that it would integrate its long seam orientation data with ILI results.\nAccordingly, upon consideration of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.\nwithin 180 days of their discovery.\nsignificant corrosion along longitudinal seam welds.1 To identify longitudinal seam welds where\n§ 195.452(h)(4)(iii) by failing to properly identify anomalous conditions that must be remediated\nThis finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken against Respondent.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item 1 in the Notice for a violation of 49\nC.F.R. § 195.452. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation\nof hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the\napplicable safety standards established under chapter 601.\nIn its Response, ConocoPhillips requested an adjustment of the 60-day deadline in the proposed\nCompliance Order for integrating its longitudinal seam orientation data with the ILI results.\nRespondent explained that it needed additional time to integrate and analyze all the information.\nThe Director has reviewed and agrees with Respondent’s alternative schedule, which is reflected\nin the amended compliance terms below. This Compliance Order, however, does not constitute\nacceptance or approval of the proposed corrective actions outlined in the company’s Response.\nThe Director will review and address the adequacy of ConocoPhillips’ plans and procedures in\nthe context of submittals provided to the Director in response to this Compliance Order.\nPursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Respondent is\nordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety regulations\napplicable to its operations. Respondent must:\n1. Review its in-line inspection data and/or records to verify that all of the defects\nassociated with long seam corrosion have been discovered, categorized, and repaired in\naccordance with 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii).\n2. In accordance with the schedule proposed in Respondent’s Response, and in no event\nlater than December 31, 2009, complete the above item and submit the required\ndocumentation and procedures to the Director, Western Region, Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration, 12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite 110, Lakewood,\nColorado 80228.\n1 Subsection (H) of 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii), as quoted above.\n\n\n\n4\n3. Maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated with fulfilling this\nCompliance Order and report the total costs to the Director as follows: (a) total cost\nassociated with preparation/revision of plans and procedures, and performance of studies\nand analyses; and (b) total cost associated with physical changes, if any, to the pipeline\ninfrastructures, including replacements and additions.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent demonstrating good cause for an extension.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in administrative assessment of civil penalties not\nto exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the\nAttorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has a right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of\nthis Final Order. The petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent’s receipt of this\nFinal Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The terms of the order, including\nany required corrective action, shall remain in full force and effect unless the Associate\nAdministrator, upon request, grants a stay. The terms and conditions of this Final Order shall be\neffective upon receipt.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":12929}