# PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC — Notice of Probable Violation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 520115014
- **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:** 2011-04-06
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.402(c)(12), 195.404(b)(1), 195.404(c)(2), 195.428(a), 195.440(a).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520115014.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520115014.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520115014
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520115014
**body:**

Notice of Probable Violation involving PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(c)(12),  195.404(b)(1),  195.404(c)(2),  195.428(a),  195.440(a). The case was opened on 2011-04-06 and is reported as closed as of 2012-03-01. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520115014_closure letter_03012012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_closure%20letter_03012012.pdf

520115014_closure letter_03012012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_closure%20letter_03012012_text.pdf

520115014_Final Order_12192011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_Final%20Order_12192011.pdf

520115014_Final Order_12192011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_Final%20Order_12192011_text.pdf

520115014_NOPV PCO_04062011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_NOPV%20PCO_04062011.pdf

520115014_NOPV PCO_04062011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_NOPV%20PCO_04062011_text.pdf

520115014_Operator Response_01092012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520115014/520115014_Operator%20Response_01092012.pdf

520115014_Final Order_12192011_text.pdf

DEC 19 2011
Mr. Terry D. Roby
President
ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company
TA-02-2032
600 North Dairy Ashford Road
Houston, TX 77079
Re: CPF No. 5-2011-5014
Dear Mr. Roby:
Enclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of
violation and specifies actions that need to be taken by ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company to
comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the terms of the compliance order have been
completed, as determined by the Director, Western Region, this enforcement action will be
closed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,
or as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey D. Wiese
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Chris Hoidal, Director, Western Region, PHMSA
Mr. Alan Mayberry, Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, Pipeline Safety,
PHMSA
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [71791000164202981880]



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company, ) CPF No. 5-2011-5014
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
FINAL ORDER
On October 4-8, 2010, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a representative of the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),
conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the Glacier pipeline facilities and records of
ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company (CPPL or Respondent) from the pump station in Judith Gap,
Montana, to Billings, Montana. The Glacier pipeline runs from the Canadian border north of
Browning, Montana, to the CPPL refinery in Billings. The pipeline system is 758 miles long and
crosses the Marias, Missouri, Judith, and Musselshell rivers.
As a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to
Respondent, by letter dated April 6, 2011, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed
Compliance Order (Notice), which also included a warning item pursuant to 49 C.F.R.
§ 190.205. In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that CPPL had
committed various violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and proposed ordering Respondent to take
certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The warning item required no further action,
but warned the operator to correct the probable violation.
CPPL responded to the Notice by email dated May 6, 2011 (Response). The company did not
contest the allegations of violation and stated that it would take corrective actions to respond to
the allegations. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.
FINDINGS OF VIOLATION
In its Response, CPPL did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part
195, as follows:
Item 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(c)(12), which states:



2
§ 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies.
(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline
system a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations
and maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and
emergencies….
(c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by
paragraph (a) of this section must include procedures for the following to
provide safety during maintenance and normal operations:
(1) ….
(12) Establishing and maintaining liaison with fire, police, and other
appropriate public officials to learn the responsibility and resources of
each government organization that may respond to a hazardous liquid or
carbon dioxide pipeline emergency and acquaint the officials with the
operator's ability in responding to a hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide
pipeline emergency and means of communication.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(c)(12) by failing to establish
and maintain liaison with the appropriate fire officials in Roundup, Montana. Specifically, the
Notice alleged that CPPL’s sole liaison activity with Roundup firefighting organizations had
been through the Montana Liquid and Gas Pipeline Association’s emergency responder annual
meetings, but that no representatives from Roundup attended the 2010 meeting. The Notice
observed that firefighters from Roundup would likely be the first responders to an emergency at
CPPL’s pump station and tank farm. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation.
Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated
49 C.F.R. § 195.402(c)(12) by failing to establish and maintain liaison with the appropriate fire
officials in Roundup, Montana.
Item 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a), which states:
§ 195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection
systems.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator
shall, at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar
year, or in the case of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at
intervals not to exceed 7 ½ months, but at least twice each calendar year,
inspect and test each pressure limiting device, relief valve, pressure
regulator, or other item of pressure control equipment to determine that it
is functioning properly, is in good mechanical condition, and is adequate
from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service
in which it is used.
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to properly
inspect and test each of its relief valves. Specifically, the Notice alleged that CPPL failed to
verify that the buckling pins associated with the 300 psig relief valve at the Billings station and
the 800 psig relief valve at the Roundup station were compatible and of the correct pressure
ratings for the relief valves in which they were installed. In order to ensure that overpressure



3
safety devices are adequate for the capacity and reliability of operation for the service in which it
is used, the buckling pins installed on them must be compatible and of the correct pressure
rating. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a
review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to
properly inspect and test each of its relief valves.
Item 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.404(b), which states in
relevant part:
§ 195.404 Maps and records.
(a) ….
(b) Each operator shall maintain for at least 3 years daily operating
records that indicate –
(1) The discharge pressure at each pump station....
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.404(b) by failing to record daily
discharge pressures at its CPPL-ExxonMobil transfer pump station in Billings, Montana.
Specifically, the Notice alleged that CPPL did not have a device to record the discharge pressure
at the pump station and instead it recorded the pressure 3.65 miles away from the discharge
point. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review
of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.404(b)(1) by failing to
record daily discharge pressures at its CPPL-ExxonMobil transfer pump station.
Item 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(a), which states:
§ 195.440 Public awareness.
(a) Each pipeline operator must develop and implement a written
continuing public education program that follows the guidance provided in
the American Petroleum Institute’s (API) Recommended Practice (RP)
1162 (incorporated by reference, see § 195.3).
The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(a) by failing to properly
implement a written continuing public education program. Specifically, the Notice alleged that
CPPL did not inform emergency officials of the locations of the pipelines and terminals within
their areas of jurisdiction, and did not provide them with the location of each facility’s associated
emergency response plan, as required by CPPL’s Public Awareness Program MPR-2302A.
Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all
of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.440(a) by failing to properly
implement a written continuing public education program.
COMPLIANCE ORDER
The Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1, 2, 3, and 5 in the Notice for
violations of 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.402(c)(12), 195.428(a), 195.404(b), and 195.440(a), respectively.
Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation of hazardous liquids
or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the applicable safety



4
standards established under chapter 601. Pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and
49 C.F.R. § 190.217, Respondent is ordered to take the following actions to ensure compliance
with the pipeline safety regulations applicable to its operations:
1. With respect to the violation of § 195.402(c)(12) (Item 1), Respondent must
arrange, conduct, and document a meeting with the local firefighters in Roundup,
Montana, who would be the first responders to a fire at CPPL’s Roundup Tank Farm.
In that meeting, CPPL must ensure that Roundup firefighters have adequate
information regarding the location of local CPPL facilities and pipelines as well as a
tactical firefighting plan for response to any fires at local CPPL facilities. CPPL must
also develop a plan to periodically meet with Roundup firefighters on an ongoing
basis. CPPL must provide documentation and evidence to PHMSA showing
compliance with this item within 60 days of receipt of the Final Order.
2. With respect to the violation of § 195.428(a) (Item 2), Respondent must provide
documentation traceable to each rupture pin that shows they are compatible and of
adequate capacity and reliability for the pressure relief valve in which they are
installed. CPPL must provide documentation to PHMSA showing compliance within
60 days of receipt of the Final Order.
3. With respect to the violation of § 195.404(b) (Item 3), Respondent must install a
device capable of measuring the discharge pressures directly downstream from the
CPPL-ExxonMobil transfer pump station in Billings, Montana, within 60 days of
receipt of the Final Order. Respondent must comply with all record-keeping
requirements in § 195.404.
4. With respect to the violation of § 195.440(a) (Item 5), Respondent must give all
emergency response organizations the location of all pipeline facility locations within
their areas of jurisdiction and the location of each facility’s associated emergency
response plans. CPPL must provide documentation showing compliance with this
item within 60 days of receipt of the Final Order.
5. PHMSA requests that CPPL maintain documentation of the safety improvement
costs associated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to Chris
Hoidal, Director, Western Region. PHMSA requests that these costs be reported in
two categories: 1) total cost associated with preparation of plans, procedures, studies,
and analyses, and 2) total cost associated with replacements, additions, and other
changes to pipeline infrastructure.
The Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a
written request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an
extension.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties
not to exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the
Attorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of the United States.



5
WARNING ITEM
With respect to Item 4, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 195 but did not propose a
civil penalty or compliance order. Therefore, this is considered to be a warning item. The
warning was for:
49 C.F.R. § 195.404(c)(2) (Item 4) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to maintain a
record of the date, location, and description of each repair made to parts of the
pipeline other than pipe for at least one year.
CPPL did not contest the allegation. Accordingly, having considered such information, I find,
pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205, that a probable violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.404 (Notice Item 4)
has occurred and Respondent is hereby advised to correct such conditions. If OPS finds a
violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject to future
enforcement action.
The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49
C.F.R. § 190.5.
___________________________________ __________________________
Jeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety

520115014_closure letter_03012012_text.pdf

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
March 1, 2012
Mr. Terry D. Roby
President
ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company
TA-02-2032
600 North Dairy Ashford Road
Houston, TX 77079
CPF 5-2011-5014
Dear Mr. Roby:
On December 19, 2011, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) issued to ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Company a Final Order in the above-
referenced case. This Order included a Compliance Order. Based on our review of the
documentation you provided it has been determined that you have complied with the terms of
this Order.
Accordingly, this case is now closed and no further action is contemplated with respect to the
matters involved in this case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Chris Hoidal
Director, Western Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry
PHP-500 G. Davis (#128421)
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 15383