{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520095007","title":"ANADARKO E & P COMPANY LP — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2009-02-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.452(f)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520095007.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520095007.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520095007","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520095007","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving ANADARKO E & P COMPANY LP. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 195.452(f)(1). The case was opened on 2009-02-19 and is reported as closed as of 2011-04-12. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520095007_Decision on Petition for Reconsideration_04122011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_Decision%20on%20Petition%20for%20Reconsideration_04122011.pdf\n\n520095007_Decision on Petition for Reconsideration_04122011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_Decision%20on%20Petition%20for%20Reconsideration_04122011_text.pdf\n\n520095007_FinalOrder_04022010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_FinalOrder_04022010.pdf\n\n520095007_FinalOrder_04022010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_FinalOrder_04022010_text.pdf\n\n520095007_NOPV PCO_02192009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_NOPV%20PCO_02192009.pdf\n\n520095007_NOPV PCO_02192009_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_NOPV%20PCO_02192009_text.pdf\n\n520095007_operator response_03162009.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_operator%20response_03162009.pdf\n\n520095007_Petition For Reconsideration_04152010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520095007/520095007_Petition%20For%20Reconsideration_04152010.pdf\n\n520095007_FinalOrder_04022010_text.pdf\n\nAPR 2 2010\nMr. Dan J. Rea\nVice President, Midstream\nAnadarko Petroleum Corporation\n1201 Lake Robbins Drive\nThe Woodlands, Texas 77380\nRe: CPF No. 5-2009-5007\nDear Mr. Rea:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and finds that Anadarko Petroleum Corporation has completed the actions specified in\nthe 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: Chris Hoidal, Director, Western Region, PHMSA\nCERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7009 1410 0000 2472 2360]\n\n\n\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION\nOFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20590\n______________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nAnadarko Petroleum Corporation, ) CPF No. 5-2009-5007\n)\nRespondent. )\n______________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn September 24, 2008, 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 Anadarko\nPetroleum Corporation (Anadarko or Respondent) in Green River, Wyoming. Anadarko is an\nindependent oil and natural gas exploration and production company that operates several\nhazardous liquid pipeline systems through its subsidiaries in Wyoming.\n1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated February 19, 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 Anadarko had violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(f)(1) and proposed ordering Respondent\nto take certain measures to correct the alleged violation.\nAnadarko failed to respond within 30 days of receipt of service of the Notice. Such failure to\nrespond constitutes a waiver of Respondent’s right to contest the allegations in the Notice and\nauthorizes the entry of this Final Order.2\n1 http://www.anadarko.com/About/Pages/Overview.aspx (last accessed March 23, 2010).\n2 § 190.209(c). Respondent submitted an untimely response to the Notice by letter dated May 21, 2009 (Response).\nAnadarko did not contest the allegations of violation in that Response, but provided information concerning the\ncorrective actions it had taken.\n\n\n\n2\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(f)(1), which states, in\nrelevant part:\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence\nareas.\n(a) Which pipelines are covered by this section? This section applies to\neach hazardous liquid pipeline and carbon dioxide pipeline that could\naffect a high consequence area, including any pipeline located in a high\nconsequence area unless the operator effectively demonstrates by risk\nassessment that the pipeline could not affect the area. . . .\n(f) What are the elements of an integrity management program? An\nintegrity management program begins with the initial framework. An\noperator must continually change the program to reflect operating\nexperience, conclusions drawn from results of the integrity assessments,\nand other maintenance and surveillance data, and evaluation of\nconsequences of a failure on the high consequence area. An operator must\ninclude, at minimum, each of the following elements in its written\nintegrity management program:\n(1) A process for identifying which pipeline segments could affect a\nhigh consequence area….\nThe Notice alleged that Anadarko violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(f)(1) by improperly reducing the\ntotal mileage of segments in the Wamsutter crude oil pipeline system that could affect a high\nconsequence area (HCA). Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent stated that it had 30\nmiles worth of those segments in its 2005 Annual Report, but that it only listed 1 mile in its next\ntwo annual reports in 2006 and 2007. The Notice further alleged that the Respondent offered no\ntechnical justification for making that reduction, and that the information in the National Pipeline\nMapping System (NPMS) showed that it had underrepresented its HCA mileage. As already\nnoted, Anadarko has waived its right to contest these allegations.\nreview of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(f)(1) by failing\nto follow a process for identifying and reducing the total mileage of pipeline segments that could\naffect an HCA.\n3 Accordingly, based upon a\nThis finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken against Respondent.\n3 In its untimely Response, Anadarko questioned whether an abandoned subdivision should be designated as an\n“other populated area” in the NPMS. I note that such designations, which are based on data obtained from the U.S.\nCensus Bureau, cannot be unilaterally changed by OPS. Although an operator is not necessarily bound by a NPMS\ndesignation when determining whether a pipeline segment could affect an HCA, the company must follow a process\nfor identifying mileage of pipeline segments that could affect an HCA.\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. § 195.452(f)(1). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the\ntransportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to\ncomply with the applicable safety standards established under chapter 601. The Director has\nindicated that Respondent has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance\norder:\n1. In its Response, Anadarko stated that it had 11.9 miles of pipeline\nsegments that could affect HCAs and submitted a third-party\ntechnical report describing the methodology used in making that\ndetermination. The Director has reviewed that information and\ndetermined 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\n\n520095007_Decision on Petition for Reconsideration_04122011_text.pdf\n\nAPR 12 2011\nMr. Dan J. Rea\nVice President, Midstream\nAnadarko Petroleum Corporation\n1201 Lake Robbins Drive\nThe Woodlands, Texas 77380\nRe: CPF No. 5-2009-5007\nDear Mr. Rea:\nEnclosed please find the Decision on Reconsideration issued in the above-referenced case. It\ngrants your Petition for Reconsideration. Service of the Decision by certified mail is deemed\neffective upon the date of mailing, or as otherwise 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 [7005 1160 0001 0041 3658]\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 )\nAnadarko Petroleum Corporation, ) CPF No. 5-2009-5007\n)\n)\n)\nPetitioner. )\n_______________________________)\nDECISION ON RECONSIDERATION\nIn an April 2, 2010 Final Order, I found that Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko or\nPetitioner) violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(f)(1) by improperly reducing the total mileage of\nsegments in its Wamsutter crude oil pipeline system that could affect a high consequence area\n(HCA). By letter dated April 15, 2010, Anadarko filed a timely Petition for Reconsideration\n(Petition) of that Final Order with the Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA.\nPetitioner asks that I reconsider the finding in the Final Order that it failed to submit a timely\nwritten response to the February 19, 2009 Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed\nCompliance Order (Notice) in this case. In support of that request, Anadarko notes that it first\nresponded to the Notice in a March 16, 2009 letter to the Western Region, PHMSA.\nThe Pipeline Safety Regulations permit the filing of a petition for reconsideration of a final\nreconsideration is an opportunity to present the agency with previously unavailable information\norder. It is not a right of appeal or to seek a de novo review of the record.1 Rather,\nand, if appropriate, to request that any errors in the final order be corrected. That is why the\nAssociate Administrator does not consider repetitious information or arguments on\nreconsideration. It is also why a petitioner must provide a valid reason for consideration of facts\nor arguments that were not raised on its behalf in a timely manner.\nTo be timely, a respondent must submit a written response “within 30 days of receipt of a notice\nof probable violation.”2 Petitioner’s March 16, 2009 letter to the Western Region met that\nrequirement in all respects.\n3\nAccordingly, I am withdrawing the finding in the Final Order that\nAnadarko failed to submit a timely written response in this case.\n1 49 C.F.R. § 190.215(a)-(e).\n2 49 C.F.R. § 190.209.\n3 Due to a clerical error, this letter was not included in the case file until after the issuance of the Final Order.\n\n\n\n2\nAs Anadarko did not contest the allegation of probable violation in that response or request any\nfurther relief in its Petition, I am affirming the remainder of the Final Order without\nmodification.\nRELIEF GRANTED\nBased on the information provided in the Petition, a review of the relevant portions of the record,\nand for the reasons stated above, I am withdrawing the finding in the Final Order that Anadarko\nfailed to submit a timely written response in this case. The remainder of the Final Order is\naffirmed without modification.\nThis Decision is the final administrative action in this proceeding.\n_____________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":12068}