{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 52021003WL","title":"ROCKY MOUNTAIN MIDSTREAM PIPELINE LLC — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2021-02-12","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 195.452(b)(1), 195.452(b)(2), 195.452(f)(1), 195.452(l)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52021003wl.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52021003wl.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52021003wl","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/52021003WL","body":"Warning Letter involving ROCKY MOUNTAIN MIDSTREAM PIPELINE LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.452(b)(1),  195.452(b)(2),  195.452(f)(1),  195.452(l)(1). The case was opened on 2021-02-12 and is reported as closed as of 2021-02-12. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n52021003WL_Operator Response to Notice_03102021_(20-172154).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52021003WL/52021003WL_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_03102021_(20-172154).pdf\n\n52021003WL_Warning Letter_02122021_(20-172154).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52021003WL/52021003WL_Warning%20Letter_02122021_(20-172154).pdf\n\n52021003WL_Warning Letter_02122021_(20-172154)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52021003WL/52021003WL_Warning%20Letter_02122021_(20-172154)_text.pdf\n\n52021003WL_Warning Letter_02122021_(20-172154)_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nVIA E-MAIL TO MR. MARK CLUFF\nFebruary 12, 2021\nMr. Mark Cluff\nVP Safety & Ops Discipline\nRocky Mountain Midstream Pipeline LLC\nOne Williams Center\n43-1\nTulsa, OK 74103\nCPF 5-2021-003-WL\nDear Mr. Cluff:\nFrom October 19, 2020 through October 23, 2020, a representative of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United\nStates Code (U.S.C.), inspected your Rocky Mountain Midstream Pipeline, LLC which extends\nfrom Hudson, Colorado to Whitecliff, Colorado.\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 (CFR). The items inspected\nand the probable violations are:\n1. § 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(b) What program and practices must operators use to manage pipeline integrity? Each\noperator of a pipeline covered by this section must:\n1\n\n\n\n(1) Develop a written integrity management program that addresses the risks on\neach segment of pipeline in the first column of the following table not later than the\ndate in the second column:\nPipeline Date\nCategory 1 March 31, 2002.\nCategory 2 February 18, 2003.\nCategory 3 1 year after the date the pipeline operation\nbegins.\nCurrent operator failed to satisfy the requirements of §195.452(f)(1) by not having a process in\nplace or conducting the process to meet the requirement noted in §195.452(b)(2) which is\nidentification of could affect segments (CAS). Current operator acquired the Rocky Mountain\nPipeline on August 3, 2018 and reviewed could affect segments near the end of 2019 a year after\nthe acquisition. So, CAS were not identified until nearly two years after the pipeline began\noperation on October, 2017. Furthermore, the operator calculated the Worst-Case Discharge\n(WCD) incorrectly and this was discovered during the audit. The WCD calculation was wrong\nby a factor of ten times which resulted in a correction to the CAS by more than doubling the\nCAS mileage noted in the attached document. CAS mileage increased from 1.17 miles to 2.69\nmiles or by 130% increase in CAS mileage. Furthermore, §195.452(b)(1) was not complied with\nsince an Integrity Management (IM) Plan was not in place until late 2019 when the operator\ndetermined that they in fact had CAS.\n2. § 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(b) What program and practices must operators use to manage pipeline integrity? Each\noperator of a pipeline covered by this section must:\n(2) Include in the program an identification of each pipeline or pipeline segment in\nthe first column of the following table not later than the date in the second column:\nPipeline Date\nCategory 1 December 31, 2001.\nCategory 2 November 18, 2002.\nCategory 3 Date the pipeline begins operation.\nCurrent operator failed to satisfy the requirements of §195.452(f)(1) by not having a process in\nplace or conducting the process to meet the requirement noted in §195.452(b)(2) which is\nidentification of could affect segments (CAS). Current operator acquired the Rocky Mountain\nPipeline on August 3, 2018 and reviewed could affect segments near the end of 2019 a year after\nthe acquisition. So, CAS were not identified until nearly two years after the pipeline began\noperation on October, 2017. Furthermore, the operator calculated the Worst-Case Discharge\n(WCD) incorrectly and this was discovered during the audit. The WCD calculation was wrong\nby a factor of ten times which resulted in a correction to the CAS by more than doubling the\nCAS mileage noted in the attached document. CAS mileage increased from 1.17 miles to 2.69\nmiles or by 130% increase in CAS mileage. Furthermore, §195.452(b)(1) was not complied with\n2\n\n\n\nsince an IM Plan was not in place until late 2019 when the operator determined that they in fact\nhad CAS.\n3. § 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(f) What are the elements of an integrity management program?\n(1) A process for identifying which pipeline segments could affect a high\nconsequence area;\nCurrent operator failed to satisfy the requirements of §195.452(f)(1) by not having a process in\nplace or conducting the process to meet the requirement noted in §195.452(b)(2) which is\nidentification of could affect segments (CAS). Current operator acquired the Rocky Mountain\nPipeline on August 3, 2018 and reviewed could affect segments near the end of 2019 a year after\nthe acquisition. So, CAS were not identified until nearly two years after the pipeline began\noperation on October, 2017. Furthermore, the operator calculated the Worst-Case Discharge\n(WCD) incorrectly and this was discovered during the audit. The WCD calculation was wrong\nby a factor of ten times which resulted in a correction to the CAS by more than doubling the\nCAS mileage noted in the attached document. CAS mileage increased from 1.17 miles to 2.69\nmiles or by 130% increase in CAS mileage. Furthermore, §195.452(b)(1) was not complied with\nsince an IM Plan was not in place until late 2019 when the operator determined that they in fact\nhad CAS.\n4. § 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, an\noperator must maintain the following records for review during an inspection:\nCurrent operator failed to satisfy the requirements of §195.452(l)(1)(ii) by not producing records\ndocumenting the timely completion of the requirement noted in §195.452(b)(2) which is\nidentification of could affect segments (CAS). Current operator acquired the Rocky Mountain\nPipeline on August 3, 2018 and reviewed could affect segments near the end of 2019 a year after\nthe acquisition. So, could affect segments were not identified until nearly two years after the\npipeline began operation on October, 2017. Furthermore, the operator calculated the Worst-Case\nDischarge (WCD) incorrectly and this was discovered during the audit. The WCD calculation\nwas wrong by a factor of ten times which resulted in a correction to the CAS by more than\ndoubling the CAS mileage noted in the attached document. CAS mileage increased from 1.17\nmiles to 2.69 miles or by 130% increase in CAS mileage.\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$218,647 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for a\nrelated series of violations. For violation occurring on or after November 27, 2018 and before\nJuly 31, 2019, the maximum penalty may not exceed $213,268 per violation per day, with a\n3\n\n\n\nmaximum penalty not to exceed $2,132,679. For violation occurring on or after November 2,\n2015 and before November 27, 2018, the maximum penalty may not exceed $209,002 per\nviolation per day, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $2,090,022. For violations occurring\nprior to November 2, 2015, the maximum penalty may not exceed $200,000 per violation per\nday, with a maximum penalty not to exceed $2,000,000 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 this\ntime. We advise you to correct the items identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in\nRocky Mountain Midstream 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 to\nCPF 5-2020-003-WL. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement\naction is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your\nresponsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the\ncomplete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions\nyou believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe\nthe redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b).\nSincerely,\nDustin Hubbard\nDirector, Western Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry\nPHP-500 J. Gilliam, T. Jez, J. Williams (#20-172154)\n4","truncated":false,"body_characters":9401}