{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520176023","title":"WYOMING PIPELINE COMPANY — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2017-08-15","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.420(b), 195.428(a), 195.583(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520176023.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520176023.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520176023","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520176023","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving WYOMING PIPELINE COMPANY. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.420(b),  195.428(a),  195.583(a). The case was opened on 2017-08-15 and is reported as closed as of 2018-05-10. Proposed civil penalty: $81,800. Assessed civil penalty: $81,800. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520176023_Final Order_05102018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520176023/520176023_Final%20Order_05102018.pdf\n\n520176023_Final Order_05102018_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520176023/520176023_Final%20Order_05102018_text.pdf\n\n520176023_NOPV PCP_08152017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520176023/520176023_NOPV%20PCP_08152017.pdf\n\n520176023_NOPV PCP_08152017_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520176023/520176023_NOPV%20PCP_08152017_text.pdf\n\n520176023_Operator Response to Notice_09142017.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520176023/520176023_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_09142017.pdf\n\n520176023_Final Order_05102018_text.pdf\n\nMay 10, 2018\nMr. William Pate\nPresident and CEO\nPar Pacific Holdings, Inc.\nOne Memorial Plaza\n800 Gessner Road, Suite 875\nHouston, TX 77024\nRe: CPF No. 5-2017-6023\nDear Mr. Pate:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $81,800 against your subsidiary, Wyoming Pipeline\nCompany, LLC. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment of the full penalty amount, by wire\ntransfer, dated October 31, 2017. This enforcement action is now closed. Service of the Final\nOrder by certified mail is effective upon the date of mailing as provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nAlan K. Mayberry\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMr. Michael Farnsworth, Senior Vice President and Refinery Manager, Wyoming\nPipeline Company, LLC, 10 Stampede Street, Newcastle, WY 82701\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\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 )\n)\n)\nWyoming Pipeline Company, LLC, )\na subsidiary of Wyoming Refining Company, )\nRespondent. )\n_________________________________________ )\n) CPF No. 5-2017-6023\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom December 13-15, 2016, 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 Wyoming Pipeline\nCompany, LLC (WPC or Respondent), in Newcastle, Wyoming. Respondent operates\napproximately 150 miles of 6-, 8-, and 10-inch, low-stress, crude oil pipelines in Niobrara and\nWeston Counties, Wyoming. Approximately 148 miles are regulated rural pipelines, and\napproximately 1.86 miles cross a small non-rural area within Newcastle, Wyoming. WPC\ntransports crude oil to Wyoming Refining Company’s refinery. WPC is a subsidiary of\nWyoming Refining Company.1\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated August 15, 2017, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil\nPenalty (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that\nWPC had violated 49 C.F.R. §§ 195.420(b), 195.428(a), and 195.583(a) and proposed assessing\na civil penalty of $81,800 for the alleged violations.\nWPC responded to the Notice by letter dated September 14, 2017 (Response). In its Response,\nthe company did not contest the allegations of violation but requested that the civil penalty be\nreevaluated. Subsequently, on October 31, 2017, WPC paid the proposed administrative civil\npenalty of $81,800 by wire transfer, as provided under 49 C.F.R § 190.227. In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.208(a)(1), such payment authorizes the Associate Administrator to make\nfindings of violation and to issue this final order without further proceedings. Respondent did\nnot request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\n1 US SEC Form 10-K, Par Pacific Holdings, Inc., available at\nhttp://www.edgarexplorer.com/EFX dll/EdgarPro.dll?FetchFilingHTML1?SessionID=jajsqfEcPY-9E-\n9&ID=11916133 (last accessed January 23, 2018). Note, Par Pacific Holdings is the parent of Hermes\nConsolidated, LLC (d/b/a Wyoming Refining Company).\n\n\n\nCPF 5-2017-6023\nPage 2\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, WPC did not contest the allegations in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part\n195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b), which states:\n§ 195.420 Valve maintenance.\n(a) …\n(b) Each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 7½ months, but at\nleast twice each calendar year, inspect each mainline valve to determine that\nit is functioning properly.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) by failing to inspect each\nmainline valve to determine that it was functioning properly, at intervals not exceeding 7½\nmonths but at least twice each calendar year. Specifically, the Notice alleged that WPC had\nseven mainline valves but it failed to conduct 14 inspections in 2013 (i.e., 7 x 2 = 14), eight\ninspections in 2014, eight inspections in 2015, and one inspection in 2016.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) by failing to inspect each\nmainline valve to determine that it was functioning properly, at intervals not exceeding 7½\nmonths but at least twice each calendar year.\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a), which states:\n§ 195.428 Overpressure safety devices and overfill protection systems.\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator\nshall, at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar\nyear, or in the case of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at\nintervals not to exceed 7½ months, but at least twice each calendar year,\ninspect and test each pressure limiting device, relief valve, pressure\nregulator, or other item of pressure control equipment to determine that it is\nfunctioning properly, is in good mechanical condition, and is adequate from\nthe standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service in\nwhich it is used.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to inspect and test\neach overpressure safety device to determine that it was functioning properly, was in good\nmechanical condition, and was adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of\noperation for the service in which it was used, at intervals not exceeding 15 months but at least\ntwice each calendar year. Specifically, the Notice alleged that WPC failed to have any records of\nover-pressure protection inspections for the following 13 over-pressure safety devices in 2015:\n Mush Creek Station: One overpressure switch, one pressure sender, and three\npressure relief valves;\n Thunder Creek Station: One overpressure switch, one pressure sender, and two\n\n\n\nCPF 5-2017-6023\nPage 3\npressure relief valves;\n Butte Junction Station: One pressure sender and one pressure relief valve; and\n HA Creek Station: One overpressure switch and one pressure sender\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to inspect and\ntest 13 overpressure safety devices to determine that they were functioning properly, were in\ngood mechanical condition, and were adequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of\noperation for the service in which they were used, at intervals not exceeding 15 months but at\nleast twice each calendar year.\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.583(a), which states:\n§ 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\nto the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion, as follows:\nIf the pipeline is located: Then the frequency of inspection is:\nOnshore ………………………….\nOffshore ………………………….\nAt least once every 3 calendar years, but\nwith intervals not exceeding 39 months\nAt least once each calendar year, but\nwith intervals not exceeding\n15 months\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.583(a) by failing to inspect each\npipeline or portion of pipeline for evidence of atmospheric corrosion at least once every three\ncalendar years, but with intervals not exceeding 39 months. Specifically, the Notice alleged that\nWPC failed to inspect the following six pipeline facilities at least once between 2014 and 2016:\n Mush Creek to Buck Creek segment;\n Buck Creek to Lance Creek segment;\n Fiddler Creek facility;\n Mush Creek facility; and\n Mainline valves at Simmons Creek and Cheyenne River crossings.\nRespondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly, based upon a review of all\nof the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.583(a) by failing to inspect each\npipeline or portion of pipeline for evidence of atmospheric corrosion at least once every three\ncalendar years, but with intervals not exceeding 39 months.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\n\n\n\nCPF 5-2017-6023\nPage 4\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$200,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations.2 In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; any effect that\nthe penalty may have on its ability to continue doing business; and the good faith of Respondent\nin attempting to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. In addition, I may consider the\neconomic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction because of subsequent\ndamages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice proposed a total civil\npenalty of $81,800 for the violations cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $31,100 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.420(b), for failing to inspect each mainline valve from 2013 to 2016 to determine that it\nwas functioning properly at intervals not exceeding 7½ months, but at least twice each calendar\nyear. In its Response, WPC did not contest the allegation of violation but requested that the\npenalty be reviewed. Subsequently, on October 31, 2017, Respondent paid the proposed civil\npenalty in full. Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.208(a)(1), such payment waives WPC’s opportunity to\ncontest the penalty amount. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the\nassessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $31,100 for violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.420(b).\nItem 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $26,600 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.248(a), for failing to inspect and test each overpressure safety device to determine that it\nwas functioning properly, was in good mechanical condition, and was adequate from the\nstandpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service in which it was used at intervals\nnot exceeding 15 months, but at least twice each calendar year. WPC neither contested the\nallegation nor presented any evidence or argument justifying a reduction in or elimination of the\nproposed penalty. Respondent paid the penalty in full on October 31, 2017. Accordingly,\nhaving reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil\npenalty of $26,600 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.248(a).\nItem 3: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $24,100 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.583(a), for failing to inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline for evidence of\natmospheric corrosion at least once every three calendar years, but with intervals not exceeding\n39 months. WPC neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument\njustifying a reduction in or elimination of the proposed penalty. Respondent paid the penalty in\nfull on October 31, 2017. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the\nassessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $24,100 for violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.583(a).\n2 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See, e.g., Pipeline Safety: Inflation Adjustment of Maximum\nCivil Penalties, 82 Fed. Reg. 19325 (April 27, 2017).\n\n\n\nCPF 5-2017-6023\nPage 5\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nitems cited above, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $81,800, which was paid in full by wire\ntransfer on October 31, 2017.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nMay 10, 2018\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":13691}