{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520090030","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":"2009-11-30","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.739(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520090030.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520090030.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520090030","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520090030","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.739(a). The case was opened on 2009-11-30 and is reported as closed as of 2010-03-30. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520090030_FinalOrder_03302010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520090030/520090030_FinalOrder_03302010.pdf\n\n520090030_FinalOrder_03302010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520090030/520090030_FinalOrder_03302010_text.pdf\n\n520090030_NOPV letter_11302009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520090030/520090030_NOPV%20letter_11302009.pdf\n\n520090030_NOPV letter_11302009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520090030/520090030_NOPV%20letter_11302009_text.pdf\n\n520090030_operator response to notice_12302009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520090030/520090030_operator%20response%20to%20notice_12302009.pdf\n\n520090030_FinalOrder_03302010_text.pdf\n\nMAR 30 2010\nMr. Todd L. Tullio\nManager, Regulatory Compliance\nConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company\nThreadneedle TN-5100\n600 North Dairy Ashford\nPO Box 2197\nHouston, TX 77252\nRe: CPF No. 5-2009-0030\nDear Mr. Tullio:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and finds that ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company has completed the actions specified\nin the Notice to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. Therefore, this case is now 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. Chris Hoidal, Director, Western Region, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7009 1410 0000 2472 5293]\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 ) CPF No. 5-2009-0030\nCompany, )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n______________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn August 18-19, 2009, 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 ConocoPhillips\nPipe Line Company (Conoco or Respondent)1 in Santa Maria, California. According to the OPS\nviolation report, Conoco operates two natural gas pipelines in the area, both of which are\nremotely monitored from a field office in Ponca City, Oklahoma. The first, NG 22, receives\nnatural gas from the Southern California Gas Company (SOCAL), the Nation’s largest natural\ngas distribution utility.2 The second, NG 23, receives natural gas from Pacific Gas and Electric\nCompany (PG&E), which operates 42,141 miles of natural gas distribution pipelines and 6,438\nmiles of transportation pipelines.\n3\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated November 30, 2009, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed\nCompliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed\nfinding that Respondent had violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a) and proposed ordering Respondent\nto take certain measures to correct the alleged violation.\n1 According to its website, “ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company (CPPL) is a wholly owned subsidiary of\nConocoPhillips. CPPL operates more than 11,000 miles of pipelines and more than 60 storage terminals in the\nUnited States. CPPL transports both raw and finished petroleum products, including crude oil, propane and refined\nproducts such as gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. Motor fuels are stored at terminals where tanker trucks pick them up\nfor delivery to local retail outlets.” http://www.conocophillipspipeline.com/EN/Pages/index.aspx (accessed Mar. 9,\n2010).\n2 http://www.socalgas.com/aboutus/profile.html (accessed Mar. 9, 2010).\n3 http://www.pge.com/about/company/profile/ (accessed Mar. 9, 2010).\n\n\n\n2\nConoco responded to the Notice by letter dated December 30, 2009 (Response). Respondent did\nnot contest the allegations of violation but provided information concerning the corrective\nactions it had taken. Conoco did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Conoco did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part\n192, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a), which states:\n§ 192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations: Inspection and\ntesting.\n(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief device (except rupture discs),\nand pressure regulating station and its equipment must be subjected at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, to\ninspections and tests to determine that it is--\n(1) In good mechanical condition;\n(2) Adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of\noperation for the service in which it is employed;\n(3) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, set to control or\nrelieve at the correct pressure consistent with the pressure limits of\n§ 192.201(a); and\n(4) Properly installed and protected from dirt, liquids, or other\nconditions that might prevent proper operation.\nThe Notice alleged that Conoco violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a) by failing to inspect, test, and\ndocument the mechanical condition, adequacy, and operational reliability of the pressure relief\ndevices on the Santa Maria pipeline system. Specifically, the Notice alleged that SOCAL and\nPG&E had control over the pressure relief devices on NG22 and NG23, respectively, but that\nConoco also had an obligation to ensure that the inspection and testing of those devices complied\nwith the requirements of § 192.739(a). The Notice further alleged that Conoco could not\nproduce records showing that the SOCAL and PG&E had complied with § 192.739(a) at the time\nof the OPS inspection. In the alternative, the Notice stated that Respondent could ensure\ncompliance with § 192.739(a) by installing its own pressure relief devices on NG22 and NG23\nand then performing the required tests and inspections itself. Conoco did not contest this\nallegation of violation and confirmed that the company would install its own pressure relief\ndevices on these lines during the current calendar year. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.739(a).\n\n\n\n3\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item 1 in the Notice for violation of 49\nC.F.R. § 192.739(a). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the\ntransportation of gas or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the\napplicable safety standards established under chapter 601. The Director has indicated that\nRespondent has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance order:\n1. On December 30, 2009, Conoco provided the Director with documentation of the\nrequired inspections and testing of the pressure relief devices on NG 22 and NG 23.\nConoco further indicated that the company would install its own relief devices on\nboth pipelines in 2010. The Director has reviewed this information and determined\nthat it satisfies the terms of the proposed compliance order.\nAccordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore,\nthe compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon receipt of service.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":8007}