{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520105029M","title":"MERIT ENERGY COMPANY — Notice of Amendment","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2010-10-21","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of amendment citing 195.214(a), 195.402(c)(8), 195.402(c)(9), 195.402(e)(3), 195.402(e)(8), 195.404(a)(1), 195.404(c)(3), 195.420(a), 195.557(a), 195.563(a), 195.573(c), 195.589(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520105029m.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520105029m.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520105029m","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520105029M","body":"Notice of Amendment involving MERIT ENERGY COMPANY. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.214(a),  195.402(c)(8),  195.402(c)(9),  195.402(e)(3),  195.402(e)(8),  195.404(a)(1),  195.404(c)(3),  195.420(a),  195.557(a),  195.563(a),  195.573(c),  195.589(c). The case was opened on 2010-10-21 and is reported as closed as of 2011-06-20. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520105029M_closure letter_06202011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520105029M/520105029M_closure%20letter_06202011.pdf\n\n520105029M_closure letter_06202011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520105029M/520105029M_closure%20letter_06202011_text.pdf\n\n520105029M_notice of amendment_10212010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520105029M/520105029M_notice%20of%20amendment_10212010.pdf\n\n520105029M_notice of amendment_10212010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520105029M/520105029M_notice%20of%20amendment_10212010_text.pdf\n\n520105029M_operator_response_12092010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520105029M/520105029M_operator_response_12092010.pdf\n\n520105029M_notice of amendment_10212010_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF AMENDMENT\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nOctober 21, 2010\nMr. Jay Prudhomme\nVice President\nMerit Energy Company\n1327 Noel Road, Suite 500\nDallas, TX 75240\nCPF 5-2010-5029M\nDear Mr. Prudhomme:\nBetween May 3 and May 6, 2010, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, inspected\nMerit Energy’s procedures for Operations and Maintenance of the Sage Creek NGL pipeline and\nthe Bairoil CO2 pipeline in Casper, Wyoming.\nOn the basis of the inspection, PHMSA has identified apparent inadequacies within Merit’s plans\nor procedures, as described below:\n1. §195.214 Welding procedures.\n(a) Welding must be performed by a qualified welder in accordance with welding\nprocedures qualified under Section 5 of API 1104 or Section IX of the ASME Boiler\nand Pressure Vessel Code (ibr, see § 195.3) . The quality of the test welds used to\nqualify the welding procedure shall be determined by destructive testing.\nMerit’s Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Procedural Manual pertaining to the welding\nprocedures is inadequate because Merit’s procedure 6.6 for welding, NDT and repair procedures\nrefers to the “latest approved” edition of API 1104; however, the “latest approved” edition\nnumber of API 1104 is not listed within their manual. That is not consistent with the\nrequirement of Part 195.214(a). An operator cannot simply refer to the “latest approved” edition\n\n\n\nof a standard that is referenced by Part 195. The welding procedure referenced the specific API\n1104 edition that will be used.\n2. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a) of\nthis section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(8) In the case of pipeline that is not equipped to fail safe, monitoring from an\nattended location pipeline pressure during startup until steady state pressure and\nflow conditions are reached and during shut-in to assure operation within limits\nprescribed by §195.406.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to shut-in operation is inadequate because Merit’s\nemergency shutdown procedure for the Sage Creek NGL pipeline did not require the pipeline\npressures to be monitored. Per 195.402(c)(8), a pipeline that is not equipped with fail safe\nmechanism must have a written procedure to require monitoring during shut-in and to assure\noperations within the Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP) of the pipeline.\n3. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a) of\nthis section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during\nmaintenance and normal operations:\n(9) In the case of facilities not equipped to fail safe that are identified under\n§195.402(c)(4) or that control receipt and delivery of the hazardous liquid or carbon\ndioxide, detecting abnormal operating conditions by monitoring pressure,\ntemperature, flow or other appropriate operational data and transmitting this data\nto an attended location.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to pipeline operations is inadequate because Merit’s\nnormal and abnormal operations procedures did not provide clear guidance for detecting\nabnormal operations. Merit is monitoring pressure, temperature, flow, and other operational data\nfrom the following sites and transmitting data to attended location: the Sage Creek NGL\npipeline at the Highway 59 crossing identified per 195.402(c)(4), the receipt of NGL at the Sage\nCreek Gas Processing Plant, the delivery of NGL at the Sage Creek Meter Station, the Bairoil\nCO2 pipeline at the receipt of CO2 at Chute Creek, and the delivery of CO2 at the Bairoil Recycle\nPlant. Regardless, Merit does not have procedures that allow those personnel at the Attwood\nfacilities to detect when an abnormal operation is or has occurred. An operator must have\nwritten procedures for detecting abnormal operations by monitoring pressures, temperatures,\nflow rates or other appropriate operational data at facilities that are identified under\n§194.402(c)(4), and the control receipt and delivery of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide are\nmonitored from an attended location.\n4. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(e) Emergencies. The manual required by paragraph (a) of this section must\ninclude procedures for the following to provide safety when an emergency condition\noccurs;\n2\n\n\n\n(3) Having personnel, equipment, instruments, tools, and material available as\nneeded at the scene of an emergency.\nMerit’s Emergency Procedural Manual pertaining to response equipment is inadequate because\nMerit’s procedure 4A.15 did not include a list of available emergency response equipment for\neither the Sage Creek NFL pipeline or Bairoil CO2 pipeline. Emergency response procedures\nmust include information for response personnel that directs them to available equipment,\ninstruments, tools, and materials that may be needed in the case of an emergency.\n5. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(e) Emergencies. The manual required by paragraph (a) of this section must\ninclude procedures for the following to provide safety when an emergency condition\noccurs;\n(8) In the case of failure of a pipeline transporting a highly volatile liquid, use of\nappropriate instruments to assess the extent and coverage of the vapor cloud and\ndetermine the hazardous areas.\nMerit’s Procedural Manual pertaining to emergency response is inadequate because Merit’s\nprocedures for the Sage Creek NGL pipeline did not describe all of the necessary steps to be\ntaken in an event of a release of HVL to assess the extent and coverage of a vapor cloud, and\ndetermine the hazardous areas by using appropriate instruments. An operator of HVL pipelines\nmust have a written emergency procedure for responding to a release and for determining the\nextent and coverage of the vapor cloud, and determine the hazardous areas by using appropriate\ninstruments.\n6. §195.404 Maps and Records.\n(a) Each operator shall maintain current maps and records of its pipeline systems\nthat include at least the following information;\n(1) Location and identification of the following pipeline facilities;\n(v) Facilities to which §195.402(c) (9) applies;\n(vii) Safety devices to which §195.428 applies.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to maps and records is inadequate because Merit’s\nmaps and records procedure 2.3, paragraph 2.a. refers to Part 195.402(c) (9) and Part 195.428 as\nitems that will be maintained on their maps. That is not consistent with the requirement of Part\n195.404(a) (1). An operator’s procedures for maintaining current maps and records cannot\nsimply refer to Part 195 for guidance. A procedure must be described in detail on how each type\nof pipeline facilities to be included.\n7. §195.404 Maps and Records.\n(c) Each operator shall maintain the following records for the periods specified;\n(3) A record of each inspection and test required by this subpart shall be\nmaintained for at least 2 years or until the next inspection or test is performed,\nwhichever is longer.\n3\n\n\n\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to maps and records is inadequate because Merit’s\nprocedure 2.16 for complying with §195.402(c) (13) did not include all the documentation\nrequirements. An operator’s O&M procedures must include a record of each inspection and test\nthat is covered by their procedures. In addition, Merit’s emergency response training review\nprocedure 2.2.4 for complying with §195.403(b) (1) did not include all the documentation\nrequirements.\n8. §195.420 Valve maintenance.\n(a) Each operator shall maintain each valve that is necessary for the safe operation\nof its pipeline systems in good working order at all times.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to valve maintenance is inadequate because Merit’s\nvalve procedure 2.11.5 did not describe in detail how to maintain each valve that is necessary for\nthe safe operation of its pipeline system so it will be in good working order at all times.\nFurthermore, Merit’s procedure 2.11.5 did not identify what valves are necessary for the safe\noperation of its pipeline system. Furthermore, the operator must maintain a listing of those\nvalves required to be in good working order to ensure the safe operation of its pipeline system\nand so pipeline personnel know which valves must be maintained per §195.420(a).\n9. §195.557 Which pipelines must have coating for external corrosion control?\nExcept bottoms of aboveground breakout tanks, each buried or submerged pipeline\nmust have an external coating for external corrosion control if the pipeline is--\n(a) Constructed, relocated, replaced, or otherwise changed after the applicable date\nin Sec. 195.401(c), not including the movement of pipe covered by Sec. 195.424; or\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to external corrosion control program is inadequate\nbecause Merit’s procedure 2.12.1.5 only reference Part 195.401(c). An operator’s external\ncorrosion control procedures must specify the date when external coatings are required and on\nwhich pipeline facilities.\n10. §195.563 Which pipelines must have cathodic protection?\n(a) Each buried or submerged pipeline that is constructed, relocated, replaced, or\notherwise changed after the applicable date in Sec. 195.401(c) must have cathodic\nprotection. The cathodic protection must be in operation not later than 1 year after\nthe pipeline is constructed, relocated, replaced, or otherwise changed, as applicable.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to external corrosion control program is inadequate\nbecause Merit’s procedure 2.12.1.5 only referenced 195.401(c) for the applicable date of which\npipelines constructed, relocated, replaced, or otherwise changed must have cathodic protection\nprogram. An operator’s procedure cannot only reference Part 195. The procedure must define\nthe actual dates of when a cathodic protection program must be implemented and on which\npipelines.\n4\n\n\n\n11. §195.573 What must I do to monitor external corrosion control?\n(c) Rectifiers and other devices. You must electrically check for proper\nperformance each device in the first column at the frequency stated in the second\ncolumn.\nDevice Check frequency\nRectifier.................................\nAt least six times each calendar year, but\nReverse current switch\nwith intervals not exceeding 2 ½ months\nDiode\nInterference bond whose failure\nwould jeopardize structural\nprotection\nOther interference bond.................. At least once each calendar year, but with\nintervals not exceeding 15 months.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to external corrosion control monitoring program is\ninadequate because Merit’s Sage Creek external corrosion control procedure 2.12.1.7 states that\neach critical bond, reverse current switch and diode must be inspected once each calendar year\nnot to exceed 15 months. An operator’s procedure for critical bond, reverse current switch, and\ndiode must inspect these devices at least six (6) times each calendar year with intervals not\nexceeding 2-½ months.\n12. §195.589 What corrosion control information do I have to maintain?\n(c) You must maintain a record of each analysis, check, demonstration,\nexamination, inspection, investigation, review, survey, and test required by this\nsubpart in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion control\nmeasures or that corrosion requiring control measures does not exist. You must\nretain these records for at least 5 years, except that records related to Secs. 195.569,\n195.573(a) and (b), and 195.579(b)(3) and (c) must be retained for as long as the\npipeline remains in service.\nMerit’s O&M Procedural Manual pertaining to corrosion control records is inadequate because\nMerit’s corrosion control procedure 2.12 only referenced Part §195.589 for retention\nrequirements of their corrosion control records. An operator’s corrosion control procedures\ncannot only reference Part 195 for records retention requirements. A procedure must explicitly\ndefine which corrosion control records must be retained and for how long per Part 195.589.\nResponse to this Notice\nThis Notice is provided pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60108(a) and 49 C.F.R. § 190.237. Enclosed as\npart of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators in\nCompliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be\nadvised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being\nmade publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for\nconfidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you\n5\n\n\n\nmust provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for\nconfidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information\nqualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days\nof receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this\nNotice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in\nthis Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order.\nIf, after opportunity for a hearing, your plans or procedures are found inadequate as alleged in\nthis Notice, you may be ordered to amend your plans or procedures to correct the inadequacies\n(49 C.F.R. § 190.237). If you are not contesting this Notice, we propose that you submit your\namended procedures to my office within 30 days of receipt of this Notice. This period may be\nextended by written request for good cause. Once the inadequacies identified herein have been\naddressed in your amended procedures, this enforcement action will be closed.\nIn correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to CPF 5-2010-5029M and, for each\ndocument you submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\nSincerely,\nChris Hoidal\nDirector, Western Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nEnclosure: Response Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings\ncc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry\nPHP-500 G. Davis (#128461 and #128464)\n6\n\n520105029M_closure letter_06202011_text.pdf\n\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nJune 20, 2011\nMr. Jay Prudhomme\nVice President\nMerit Energy Company\n1327 Noel Road, Suite 500\nDallas, TX 75240\nCPF 5-2010-5029M\nDear Mr. Prudhomme:\nOn May 3 through May 6, 2010, a representative from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, conducted\nan on-site pipeline safety inspection of Merit Energy Company‘s (Merit) operation and\nmaintenance procedures in Casper, Wyoming. As a result of the inspection, Merit was issued\na Notice of Amendment on October 21, 2010, which proposed amendment of your operations\nand maintenance procedures.\nMerit responded with amended procedures on December 9, 2010, May 4, 2011, and June 17,\n2011. My staff reviewed the amended procedures, and it appears that the inadequacies\noutlined in this Notice of Amendment have been corrected.\nThis letter is to inform you no further action is necessary and this case is now closed. Thank\nyou for your cooperation.\nSincerely,\nChris Hoidal\nDirector, Western Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry\nPHP-500 G. Davis (#128461 and #128464)","truncated":false,"body_characters":16935}