{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 520186014","title":"CALUMET MONTANA REFINING, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2018-06-14","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.420(b), 195.428(a), 195.505(h), 195.507, 195.507(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520186014.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520186014.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520186014","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520186014","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving CALUMET MONTANA REFINING, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.420(b),  195.428(a),  195.505(h),  195.507,  195.507(b). The case was opened on 2018-06-14 and is reported as closed as of 2019-03-08. Proposed civil penalty: $77,400. Assessed civil penalty: $77,400. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n520186014_Final Order_03082019.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520186014/520186014_Final%20Order_03082019.pdf\n\n520186014_Final Order_03082019_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520186014/520186014_Final%20Order_03082019_text.pdf\n\n520186014_NOPV PCP_06142018.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520186014/520186014_NOPV%20PCP_06142018.pdf\n\n520186014_NOPV PCP_06142018_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520186014/520186014_NOPV%20PCP_06142018_text.pdf\n\n520186014_Final Order_03082019_text.pdf\n\nMarch 8, 2019\nMr. Timothy Go\nChief Executive Officer\nCalumet Specialty Products Partners, LP\n2780 Waterfront Pkwy. E. Dr. Suite 200\nIndianapolis, IN 46214\nRe: CPF No. 5-2018-6014\nDear Mr. Go:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case to your subsidiary,\nCalumet Montana Refining, LLC. It makes findings of violation and assesses a civil penalty of\n$77,400. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment of the full penalty amount, by wire transfer,\ndated August 6, 2018. This enforcement action is now closed. Service of the Final Order by\ncertified 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\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 )\nCalumet Montana Refining, LLC, ) CPF No. 5-2018-6014\na subsidiary of Calumet Specialty )\nProducts Partners, LP, )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom October 11, 2016, through October 13, 2016, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a\nrepresentative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities and\nrecords of Calumet Montana Refining, LLC’s (CMR or Respondent), Bootlegger crude-oil\npipeline system in Great Falls, Montana. CMR is a subsidiary of Calumet Specialty Products\nPartners, LP.1 CMR has a crude-oil throughput capacity of approximately 9,800 barrels per day\nand markets gasoline, middle distillates, and asphalt to local markets in Washington, Montana,\nIdaho, and Alberta, Canada.2\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated June 14, 2018, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil\nPenalty (Notice), which also included warnings pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In accordance\nwith 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that CMR had violated 49 C.F.R.\n§§ 195.420 and 195.428 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $77,400 for the alleged\nviolations. The warning items required no further action, but warned the operator to correct the\nprobable violations or face possible future enforcement action.\nCMR failed to respond to the Notice in accordance with 49 C.F.R. §190.208, but paid the\nproposed civil penalty of $77,400 by wire transfer on August 6, 2018. Failure to respond\nconstitutes a waiver of CMR’s right to contest the allegations in the Notice. In addition, payment\nof the proposed civil penalty, in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.208(a)(1), authorizes the\nAssociate Administrator to make findings of violation and to issue this final order.\n1 Calumet Montana Refining- About Us: History, available at http://www.calumetspecialty.com/calumet-montana-\nrefinery-about-us-history (last accessed October 17, 2018).\n2 Calumet Montana Refining-About Us, available at http://www.calumetspecialty.com/about-us/facilities/calumet-\nmontana-refining (last accessed October 22, 2018).\n\n\n\nCPF 5-2018-6014\nPage 2\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nRespondent did not respond to the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R. Part 195, 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 at intervals not exceeding 7½ months, but at least twice each calendar year, to\ndetermine that it was functioning properly. Specifically, CMR had valve maintenance/inspection\nrecords for its mainline valve inspected on July 15, 2014, and April 24, 2015, but did not have\nany records or supporting evidence to show that its mainline valve was inspected twice in 2014.\nRespondent did not respond to the Notice. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the\nevidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.420(b) by failing to inspect each\nmainline valve at intervals not exceeding 7½ months, but at least twice each calendar year, to\ndetermine that it was functioning properly.\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 shall,\nat intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, or in\nthe case of pipelines used to carry highly volatile liquids, at intervals not to\nexceed 7½ months, but at least twice each calendar year, inspect and test each\npressure limiting device, relief valve, pressure regulator, or other item of\npressure control equipment to determine that it is functioning properly, is in\ngood mechanical condition, and is adequate from the standpoint of capacity and\nreliability of operation for the service in which it is used.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to inspect and\ntest, at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, each overpressure\nsafety device to determine that it was functioning properly, was in good mechanical condition,\nand was adequate from a standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service in\nwhich it was used. Specifically, the Notice alleged that at the time of the inspection, CMR failed\nto have any records of its overpressure-protection inspections for 2014, 2015, and leading up to\nthe August 2016 inspections. In addition, the Notice alleged that CMR failed to provide any\ncompleted inspection records for the rupture pin located at the refinery or the overfill devices on\nbreakout tanks 201 and 202.\nRespondent did not respond to the Notice. Accordingly, based upon a review of all of the\nevidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a) by failing to inspect and test, at\n\n\n\nCPF 5-2018-6014\nPage 3\nintervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, each overpressure safety\ndevice to determine that it was functioning properly, was in good mechanical condition, and was\nadequate from a standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service in which it was\nused.\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\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.3 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 $77,400 for the violations cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $36,000 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.420(b), for failing to inspect each mainline valve at intervals not exceeding 7½ months,\nbut at least twice each calendar year, to determine that it was functioning properly. CMR did not\nrespond to the Notice, and therefore neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence\nor argument justifying a reduction in or elimination of the proposed penalty. Accordingly,\nhaving reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil\npenalty of $36,000 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.402(b).\nItem 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $41,400 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R\n§ 195.428(a), for failing to inspect and test, at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least\nonce each calendar year, each overpressure safety device to determine that it was functioning\nproperly, was in good mechanical condition, and was adequate from a standpoint of capacity and\nreliability of operation for the service in which it was used. CMR did not respond to the Notice,\nand therefore neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence or argument justifying\na reduction in or elimination of the proposed penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the record\nand considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $41,400 for\nviolation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.428(a).\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nitems cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $77,400, which amount was paid\nin full by wire transfer on August 6, 2018.\n3 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 5-2018-6014\nPage 4\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 3, 4 and 5, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195 but did not\npropose a civil penalty or compliance order for these items. Therefore, these are considered to\nbe warning items. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.505(h) (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to provide\nappropriate training to ensure that individuals performing covered tasks have the\nnecessary knowledge and skills to perform the tasks in a manner that ensures the\nsafe operation of the pipeline facility.\n49 C.F.R. § 195.507(a) (Item 4) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to maintain\nqualification records with the pertinent information regarding tasks being\nperformed and the qualification methods being used.\n49 C.F.R. § 195.507(b) (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to maintain\nrecords supporting an individual’s current qualifications while the individual was\nperforming the covered task, and to retain records of prior qualification and\nrecords of individuals no longer performing covered tasks for a period of five\nyears.\nCMR did not respond to the Notice. However, during a follow-up visit to the facility on June 27,\n2017, CMR demonstrated to PHMSA that it had taken certain actions to address the cited items.\nIf PHMSA finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be\nsubject to future enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nMarch 8, 2019\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":12305}