# BELLE FOURCHE PIPELINE CO — Warning Letter

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 520115013W
- **title:** BELLE FOURCHE PIPELINE CO — Warning Letter
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2011-04-05
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED warning letter citing 195.452(f)(5), 195.452(f)(7), 195.452(i)(4).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520115013w.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520115013w.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520115013w
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520115013W
**body:**

Warning Letter involving BELLE FOURCHE PIPELINE CO. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.452(f)(5),  195.452(f)(7),  195.452(i)(4). The case was opened on 2011-04-05 and is reported as closed as of 2011-04-05. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520115013W_warning letter_04052011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115013W/520115013W_warning%20letter_04052011.pdf

520115013W_warning letter_04052011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115013W/520115013W_warning%20letter_04052011_text.pdf

520115013W_warning letter_04052011_text.pdf

WARNING LETTER
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
April 5, 2011
Mr. Hank True
President
Belle Fourche Pipeline
P.O. Drawer 2360
Casper, WY 82602
CPF 5-2011-5013W
Dear Mr. True:
On September 15-17, 2009 and January 10, 2011, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code,
inspected your integrity management program (IMP) in Casper, Wyoming. The IMP plan
reviewed covered the Belle Fourche, Butte and Poplar pipeline systems. The January 2011 visit
was conducted to confirm the status of issues identified in our 2009 IMP reviews.
As a result of the inspections, it appears that you have committed probable violations of the
Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, and Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and
the probable violations are:
1. §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.
(i) What preventive and mitigative measures must an operator take to protect the
high consequence area?
(4) Emergency Flow Restricting Devices (EFRD). If an operator determines that an
EFRD is needed on a pipeline segment to protect a high consequence area in the
event of a hazardous liquid pipeline release, an operator must install the EFRD. In
making this determination, an operator must, at least, consider the following
factors–the swiftness of leak detection and pipeline shutdown capabilities, the type



of commodity carried, the rate of potential leakage, the volume that can be released,
topography or pipeline profile, the potential for ignition, proximity to power
sources, location of nearest response personnel, specific terrain between the pipeline
segment and the high consequence area, and benefits expected by reducing the spill
size.
During the review of BFPL IM program, BFPL did not produce any documentation that
indicated an evaluation was conducted regarding the need for Emergency Flow Restricting
Devices (EFRD’s). We understand that as of January 10, 2011, the EFRD study is in progress.
2. §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.
(f) What are the elements of an integrity management program? An integrity
management program begins with the initial framework. An operator must
continually change the program to reflect operating experience, conclusions drawn
from results of the integrity assessments, and other maintenance and surveillance
data, and evaluation of consequences of a failure on the high consequence area. An
operator must include, at minimum, each of the following elements in its written
integrity management program:
(5) A continual process of assessment and evaluation to maintain a pipeline's
integrity (see paragraph (j) of this section).
During the review of your integrity assessments, it appears that BFPL did not adhere to the
required five (5) year assessment intervals. Furthermore, BFPL did not comply with the
notification requirements when BFPL extended their inspection interval beyond five (5) years.
The following reassessments were late and no notification to PHMSA was provided: 1) A
baseline assessment of the Poplar segment between Ekalala to Alzada was completed in
September of 2003 and the reassessment was not completed as of the 2009 inspection. 2) A
baseline assessment of the Poplar segment between Hulett and Osage was completed in
September of 2003 and the reassessment was not completed as of the 2009 inspection. 3) A
baseline assessment of the Butte Segment between Hat Creek and Guernsey was scheduled for
February of 2008 and was not completed until January 7, 2009. All of these reassessments have
been completed as of January 2011.
3. §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.
(f) What are the elements of an integrity management program? An integrity
management program begins with the initial framework. An operator must
continually change the program to reflect operating experience, conclusions drawn
from results of the integrity assessments, and other maintenance and surveillance
data, and evaluation of consequences of a failure on the high consequence area. An
operator must include, at minimum, each of the following elements in its written
integrity management program:
(7) Methods to measure the program's effectiveness (see paragraph (k) of this
section).
2



During the September, 2009, of the BFPL IM program it appeared that BFPL did not complete
their evaluation to measure the program’s effectiveness. No documentation was available for
review during that IMP inspection. As of January 10, 2011, BFPL had all documentation except
documenting when cleaning pigs are being run and the EFRD study documentation.
Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000
for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any
related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents
involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty
assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the items identified in this letter.
Failure to do so will result in Belle Fourche Pipeline being subject to additional enforcement
action.
No reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to
CPF 5-2011-5013W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement
action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your
responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the
complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions
you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe
the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).
Sincerely,
Chris Hoidal
Director, Western Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry
PHP-500 T. Finch (#124314)
3
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 6756