{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520175002W","title":"FRONT RANGE PIPELINE, LLC. — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2017-03-27","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.404(c)(3), 195.412(a), 195.420(b), 195.428(a), 195.432(b), 195.452(j)(3), 195.452(l)(1)(ii), 195.573(a)(1), 195.573(e), 195.579(b)(3), 195.583(a), 195.589(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520175002w.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520175002w.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520175002w","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520175002W","body":"Warning Letter involving FRONT RANGE PIPELINE, LLC.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.404(c)(3),  195.412(a),  195.420(b),  195.428(a),  195.432(b),  195.452(j)(3),  195.452(l)(1)(ii),  195.573(a)(1),  195.573(e),  195.579(b)(3),  195.583(a),  195.589(c). The case was opened on 2017-03-27 and is reported as closed as of 2017-03-27. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520175002W_Warning letter_03272017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520175002W/520175002W_Warning%20letter_03272017.pdf\n\n520175002W_Warning letter_03272017_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520175002W/520175002W_Warning%20letter_03272017_text.pdf\n\n520175002W_Warning letter_03272017_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nMarch 27, 2017\nMr. Richard Petersen\nPresident\nFront Range Pipeline, LLC\n803 Highway 212 South\nLaurel, MT 59044\nCPF 5-2017-5002W\nDear Mr. Petersen:\nOn August 8 through 12, and September 6 through 9, 2016, a representative of the Pipeline\nand Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49\nUnited States Code, inspected your Front Range Pipeline in Laurel, Montana.\nAs a result of the inspection, it is alleged that you have committed probable violations of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and\nthe probable violations are:\n\n\n\n1. §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(l) What records must an operator keep to demonstrate compliance?\n(1) An operator must maintain, for the useful life of the pipeline, records that\ndemonstrate compliance with the requirements of this subpart. At a minimum,\nan operator must maintain the following records for review during an inspection:\n(ii) Documents to support the decisions and analyses, including any\nmodifications, justifications, deviations and determinations made, variances, and\nactions taken, to implement and evaluate each element of the integrity\nmanagement program listed in paragraph (f) of this section.\nFront Range Pipeline, LLC (FRP) failed to provide documentation from the 2014 in-line\ninspection (ILI) assessments for the 16” ML Santa Rita to Raynesford, and 16” ML\nRaynesford to Laurel pipeline segments.\n2. §195.432 Inspection of in-service breakout tanks.\n(b) Each operator must inspect the physical integrity of in-service atmospheric\nand low-pressure steel aboveground breakout tanks according to API Std 653.\nFRP failed to inspect the physical integrity of in-service aboveground breakout tanks\naccording to the time intervals referenced in API Std 653. At the time of the inspection, it was\nnoted that FRP exceeded the five-year in-service inspections for the breakout tanks located at\nthe Laurel Refinery. Tank #95 in-service inspections occurred on October 10, 2008, and\nAugust 19, 2016. Tank #100 in-service inspections occurred on October 11, 2008, and\nSeptember 15, 2015.\n3. §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.\nFRP failed to provide records to demonstrate that the high-low level test/inspection of the\noverfill protection devices for Tanks 95 and 100 at the Laurel Refinery were performed.\n4. §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(j) What is a continual process of evaluation and assessment to maintain a\npipeline’s integrity?\n(3) Assessment intervals. An operator must establish five-year intervals, not to\nexceed 68 months, for continually assessing the pipe’s integrity. An operator\nmust base the assessment intervals on the risk the pipe poses to the high\nconsequence area to determine the priority for assessing the pipeline segments.\nAn operator must establish the assessment intervals based on the factors\nspecified in paragraph (e) of this section, the analysis of the results from the last\n2\n\n\n\nintegrity assessment, and the information analysis required by paragraph (g) of\nthis section.\nFRP failed to perform their continual assessments within the five-year interval for the\nfollowing segments: 10” Santa Rita to Cut Bank (7/8/2010, 9/26/2015), 10” ML Canadian\nBorder to Santa Rita (7/12/2010, 9/24/2015), 10” Loop Line Canadian Border to Santa Rita\n(7/5/2010, 9/26/2015), 12” Canadian Border to 16” Launcher (6/30/2010, 7/23/2015), 16”\nLauncher to Santa Rita (6/30/2009, 7/15/2014), 16” ML Santa Rita to Raynesford (6/25/2009,\n7/18/2014), and 16” ML Raynesford to Laurel (6/29/2009, 9/29/2014).\n5. §195.420 Valve maintenance.\n(b) Each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 7 ½ months, but at least twice\neach calendar year, inspect each mainline valve to determine that it is functioning\nproperly.\nFRP failed to demonstrate that an inspection on Valve #FR55 was performed during the first\npart of 2016.\n6. §195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator shall, at\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, or in the\ncase of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at intervals not to exceed 7\n½ months, but at least twice each calendar year, inspect and test each pressure\nlimiting device, relief valve, pressure regulator, or other item of pressure control\nequipment to determine that it is functioning properly, is in good mechanical\ncondition, and is adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of\noperation for the service in which it is used.\nFRP failed to demonstrate that the overpressure safety device inspections for the pipelines that\nare associated with Tanks 95 and 100 were performed for calendar years 2013 through 2016.\n7. §195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and crossing under navigable waters.\n(a) Each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 3 weeks, but at least 26 times\neach calendar year, inspect the surface conditions on or adjacent to each pipeline\nright-of-way. Methods of inspection include walking, driving, flying or other\nappropriate means of transversing the right-of-way.\nRecords available at the time of inspection indicated that the maximum three (3) week\ninterval between right-of-way inspections allowed under §195.412(a) was exceeded between\nSeptember 21, 2015 and October 13, 2015.\n3\n\n\n\n8. §195.583 What must I do to monitor atmospheric corrosion control?\n(a) You must inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed to the\natmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion as follows:\nOnshore – At least once every 3 calendar years, but with intervals not exceeding\n39 months.\nRecords were not provided to demonstrate that FRP performed atmospheric corrosion\ninspections for aboveground piping associated with breakout tanks 95 and 100, located at the\nLaurel Refinery. In addition, the 2014 atmospheric corrosion inspection records for Judith\nGap Pump Station were not provided.\nThe 2014 atmospheric corrosion inspection records for Santa Rita and Conrad Pump Stations\nwere reviewed; however, the 2011 atmospheric corrosion inspection records for those pump\nstations were not provided. Therefore, the three (3) calendar years’ inspection, but with\nintervals not exceeding 39 months, could not be determined.\nThe atmospheric corrosion inspection records for Cut Bank Pump Station were missing for\nthe last two (2) intervals. Records in the file appear to be a copy from 2005 but the date was\ncrossed out to indicate the inspection year of 2014. In addition, the atmospheric corrosion\ninspection records for Buffalo Creek were provided but the records were missing the date that\nthe inspections were performed and the personnel who did the inspection.\n9. §195.573 What must I do to monitor external corrosion control?\n(e) Corrective Action. You must correct any identified deficiency in corrosion\ncontrol as required by §195.401(b). However, if the deficiency involves a pipeline\nin an integrity management program under §195.452, you must correct the\ndeficiency as required by §195.452(h).\nRecords were not provided to demonstrate that FRP took adequate actions to correct the\nidentified 2014 deficiencies associated with Tanks 10 and 16 at the Santa Rita Terminal. The\ntanks were not meeting the -0.850V or the 100mv shift criteria. FRP changed to a four-point\ntest station in 2014 for collecting pipe-to-soil potential readings on Tank 10 and Tank 16. The\n“off” pipe-to-soil potential readings from 2015 did not meet the -0.850V criteria and the\n100mv shift was not checked and/or documented.\n10. §195.573 What must I do to monitor external corrosion control?\n(a) Protected pipelines. You must do the following to determine whether cathodic\nprotection required by this subpart complies with §195.571:\n(1) Conduct tests on the protected pipeline at least once each calendar year, but\nwith intervals not exceeding 15 months. However, if tests at those intervals are\nimpractical for separately protected short sections of bare or ineffectively coated\npipelines, testing may be done at least every 3 calendar years, but with intervals\nnot exceeding 39 months.\n4\n\n\n\nRecords were not provided to demonstrate that FRP conducted the 2013, 2014, and 2016\nannual pipe-to-soil potential readings of the Ominex 4” crossing (TS# 82730) on the 10” from\nCanadian Border to Santa Rita segment, June 2014 pipe-to-soil potential readings of the 6”\nreceiver in the Santa Rita Station, 2015 annual pipe-to-soil potential readings of the 16\" line\nsegment from Santa Rita to Laurel, and 2016 pipe-to-soil potential readings of the lines within\nthe Santa Rita Station.\nRegarding the 8\" inactive line from Laurel to Billings, FRP continues to maintain DOT\ncompliance. However, there was a missing record for Test Station #60 for calendar years\n2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Comments from cathodic protection (CP) records for this test\nstation indicated that they didn't have access during the annual pipe-to-soil potential readings.\n11. §195.579 what must I do to mitigate internal corrosion?\n(b) Inhibitors. If you use corrosion inhibitors to mitigate internal corrosion, you\nmust-\n(3) Examine the coupons or other monitoring equipment at least twice each\ncalendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 7 ½ months.\nRecords were not provided to demonstrate that FRP examined the coupons or other\nmonitoring equipment for the second part of 2015 or 2016 at Santa Rita, Cut Bank, Great\nFalls, and Laurel Stations.\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 §§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.\nRecords were not provided to demonstrate that the annual pipe-to-soil potential readings for\nthe piping at the Laurel Refinery were taken for the years 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016.\nUnder 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$205,638 per violation per day the violation persists up to a maximum of $2,056,380 for a\nrelated series of violations. For violation occurring between January 4, 2012 to August 1,\n2016, the maximum penalty may not exceed $200,000 per violation per day, with a maximum\npenalty not to exceed $2,000,000 for a related series of violations. For violations occurring\nprior to January 4, 2012, the maximum penalty may not exceed $100,000 per violation per\nday, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $1,000,000 for a related series of violations. We\nhave reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have\ndecided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at\n5\n\n\n\nthis time. We advise you to correct the item(s) identified in this letter. Failure to do so will\nresult in Front Range Pipeline, LLC being subject to additional enforcement action.\nNo reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer\nto CPF 5-2017-5002W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this\nenforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any\nportion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b),\nalong with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document\nwith the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of\nwhy you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C.\n552(b).\nSincerely,\nChris Hoidal\nDirector, Western Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry\nPHP-500 D. Fehling (#153728, #153727, and 153726)\n6","truncated":false,"body_characters":13237}