{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 52022028NOPV","title":"ENI US OPERATING CO, INC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2022-09-07","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.446(c)(4), 195.446(e)(3), 195.446(e)(5), 195.446(f)(1), 195.446(h)(5), 195.446(j)(1).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52022028nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52022028nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52022028nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/52022028NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving ENI US OPERATING CO, INC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.446(c)(4),  195.446(e)(3),  195.446(e)(5),  195.446(f)(1),  195.446(h)(5),  195.446(j)(1). The case was opened on 2022-09-07 and is reported as closed as of 2023-04-26. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n52022028NOPV_Final Order_04262023_(21-201439).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52022028NOPV/52022028NOPV_Final%20Order_04262023_(21-201439).pdf\n\n52022028NOPV_Final Order_04262023_(21-201439)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52022028NOPV/52022028NOPV_Final%20Order_04262023_(21-201439)_text.pdf\n\n52022028NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_09202022_(21-201439).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52022028NOPV/52022028NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_09202022_(21-201439).pdf\n\n52022028NOPV_PCO_09072022_(21-201439).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52022028NOPV/52022028NOPV_PCO_09072022_(21-201439).pdf\n\n52022028NOPV_PCO_09072022_(21-201439)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52022028NOPV/52022028NOPV_PCO_09072022_(21-201439)_text.pdf\n\n52022028NOPV_Final Order_04262023_(21-201439)_text.pdf\n\nApril 26, 2023\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: massimo.insulla@eni.com\nMr. Massimo Insulla\nPresident and Chief Executive Officer\nEni US Operating Co. Inc.\n3800 Centerpoint Drive, Suite 300\nAnchorage, Alaska 99503\nRe: CPF No. 5-2022-028-NOPV\nDear Mr. Insulla:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of\nviolation and finds that Eni US Operating Co. Inc., has completed the actions specified in the\nNotice to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. Therefore, this case is now closed.\nService of the Final Order by e-mail is effective upon the date of transmission and\nacknowledgement of receipt 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: Mr. Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nMr. Larry Burgess, SEQ Manager-Alaska, Eni US Operating Co. Inc.,\nlarry.burgess@eni.com\nMr. David Hart, Operations Manager-Alaska, Eni US Operating Co. Inc.,\ndavid.hart@eni.com\nCONFIRMATION OF 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 )\nEni US Operating Co. Inc., ) CPF No. 5-2022-028-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom August 2 through August 6, 2021, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, 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 Eni US Operating\nCo. Inc. (Eni or Respondent) in Anchorage and North Slope Borough, Alaska. Eni operates 25.4\nmiles of hazardous liquid pipeline in the North Slope Borough of Alaska.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated September 7, 2022, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed\nCompliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed\nfinding that Eni had committed three violations of 49 C.F.R. Part 195 and proposed ordering\nRespondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also included\nan additional four warning items pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205, which warned the operator to\ncorrect the probable violations or face possible future enforcement action.\nEni responded to the Notice by letter dated September 20, 2022 (Response). Eni contested one\nof the allegations, offered additional information, and provided amended procedures in response\nto the Notice. Respondent did not request a hearing and therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(c)(4), which states:\n§ 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . . .\n(c) Provide adequate information. Each operator must provide its\ncontrollers with the information, tools, processes and procedures necessary\n\n\n\nfor the controllers to carry out the roles and responsibilities the operator has\ndefined by performing each of the following:\n(1) . . . .\n(4) Test any backup SCADA systems at least once each calendar year,\nbut at intervals not to exceed 15 months;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(c)(4) by failing to conduct the\nrequired testing of backup SCADA systems at least once each calendar year, but at intervals not\nto exceed 15 months. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Eni’s control room management\n(CRM) program did not require backup SCADA systems to be tested, even though Eni operated\nthree backup control consoles that required testing.\nIn its Response, Eni did not contest this item but provided additional information and amended\nprocedures.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.446(c)(4) by failing to conduct the required testing of backup SCADA systems at least\nonce each calendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months.\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(e)(3), which states:\n§ 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . . .\n(e) Alarm management. Each operator using a SCADA system must\nhave a written alarm management plan to provide for effective controller\nresponse to alarms. An operator’s plan must include provisions to:\n(1) . . . .\n(3) Verify the correct safety-related alarm set-point values and alarm\ndescriptions when associated field instruments are calibrated or changed\nand at least once each calendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15\nmonths;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(e)(3) by failing to verify the\ncorrect safety-related alarm set-point valves and alarm descriptions when associated field\ninstruments were calibrated or changes, at least once per calendar year, but at intervals not to\nexceed 15 months. Specifically, the Notice alleged that Eni was unable to provide\ndocumentation to establish that it reviewed set point valves and alarm descriptions.\nIn its Response, Eni did not contest this item but provided additional information and amended\nprocedures.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.446(e)(3) by failing to verify the correct safety-related alarm set-point valves and alarm\ndescriptions when associated field instruments were calibrated or changes, at least once per\ncalendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months.\n\n\n\nItem 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(h)(5), which states:\n§ 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . . .\n(h) Training. Each operator must establish a controller training program\nand review the training program content to identify potential improvements\nat least once each calendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months.\nAn operator’s program must provide for training each controller to carry out\nthe roles and responsibilities defined by the operator. In addition, the\ntraining program must include the following elements:\n(1) . . . .\n(5) For pipeline operating setups that are periodically, but infrequently\nused, providing an opportunity for controllers to review relevant procedures\nin advance of their application;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(h)(5) by failing to include in\nits training program an opportunity for controllers to review relevant procedures for infrequently\nused pipeline operating setups in advance of their application. Specifically, the Notice alleged\nthat Eni failed to update its list of infrequent setups during annual manual reviews that would\nneed to be included in its training program.\nIn its Response, Eni requested clarification stating that while its CRM manual was missing\ncertain infrequently used setups, those setups were included in its training program. Eni stated\nthat it amended its CRM manual to include the missing setups.\nAfter reviewing the record, I find that clarification is warranted. Paragraph C of the PCO in the\nNotice describes the allegations of violation in Item 6, but references Item 5. In addition, the\nNotice proposed compliance measures for Item 6, but also listed Item 6 as a warning item. I find\nthat the Notice erroneously referenced Item 5 in paragraph C of the PCO and that Item 6 should\nhave been referenced. I also find that Item 5, not Item 6, should have been listed as a warning\nitem in the Notice.\n1 I also note that Eni, in its Response, treated Items 1, 2, and 6 as allegations\nof violation with proposed compliance measures and treated Items 3, 4, 5, and 7 as warning\nitems, which is consistent with my understanding of the record.\nAccordingly, Item 5 is issued as a warning item and is appropriately addressed below.\nItem 6: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(j)(1), which states:\n§ 195.446 Control room management.\n(a) . . . .\n(j) Compliance and deviations. An operator must maintain for review\nduring inspection:\n1 This clarification is consistent with the Response. Eni stated that Items 1, 2, and 6 “are applicable to the proposed\ncompliance order.” In addition, Item 5, and not Item 6, was addressed in section 2 of the Response, which Eni\nstated provided additional information on each warning item.\n\n\n\n(1) Records that demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this\nsection;\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.446(j)(1) by failing to maintain\nrecords that demonstrated compliance with the requirements of § 195.446(h). Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that Eni failed to provide documentation of adequate training program reviews for\n2019 and 2020 because the review forms contained limited or no notes.\nFor the reasons stated above, I find that paragraph C of the PCO should have referenced Item 6\nand that Item 6 should not have been listed as a warning item.2\nEni did not contest this allegation of violation in its Response. Eni stated it “acknowledges [the]\npast deficiency and requests that it be considered that [Eni was] able to demonstrate a pattern of\ncontinuous improvement in fulfilling this requirement in 2021.” Eni emphasized that it\nimproved its training program review process after the inspection. Eni also provided amended\nprocedures and records of its 2021 training review that the Director indicated corrected the\ndeficiency described in the Notice. While PHMSA encourages prompt corrective action, the\nevidence provided by Eni fails to show Eni’s training reviews met the requirements in\n§ 195.446(j)(1) in 2019 and 2020.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.446(j)(1) by failing to maintain records that demonstrated compliance with the\nrequirements of § 195.446(h).\nThese findings of violation will be considered prior offenses in any subsequent enforcement\naction taken against Respondent.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1, 2, and 6 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 C.F.R. § 195.446. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the\ntransportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to\ncomply with the applicable safety standards established under chapter 601. The Director has\nindicated that Respondent has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance\norder:\n1. With respect to the violation of § 195.446(c)(4) (Item 1), Respondent amended its\nprocedures to require annual testing of the backup SCADA systems and conducted a\ntest of the backup SCADA systems.\n2. With respect to the violation of § 195.446(e)(3) (Item 2), Respondent has\namended its procedures to provide instructions on how to conduct and document the\n2 This clarification is consistent with the Response. Eni stated that Items 1, 2, and 6 “are applicable to the proposed\ncompliance order.” Eni also included Item 6 in section 1 of the Response, which it stated addressed allegations of\nviolation, and not warning items.\n\n\n\nverification of the correct safety-related alarm set-point values and alarm descriptions\nwhen associated field instruments are calibrated or changed and at least once each\ncalendar year, but at intervals not to exceed 15 months and submitted records of the\nverification of the safety-related alarm set-point values and alarm descriptions.\n3. With respect to the violation of § 195.446(j)(1) (Item 6), Respondent has amended\nits procedures to provide instructions on how to conduct and document a review of\nthe controller training program and provided records of the 2021 completed controller\ntraining program review.\nAccordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to these violations.\nTherefore, the compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order.\nWARNING ITEMS\nWith respect to Items 3, 4, 5 and 7, the Notice alleged probable violations of Part 195, but\nidentified them as warning items pursuant to § 190.205. The warnings were for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.446(e)(5) (Item 3) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to monitor the\ncontent and volume of general activity being directed to and required of each\ncontroller at least once per calendar year, but at intervals not exceeding 15\nmonths;\n49 C.F.R. § 195.446(f)(1) (Item 4) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to require\ncoordination between control room representatives, operator’s management, and\nassociated field personnel when planning and implementing physical changes to\npipeline equipment or configuration;\n49 C.F.R. § 195.446(h)(5) (Item 5) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to include, in\nits controller training, an opportunity for controllers to review relevant procedures\nfor infrequently used pipeline operating setups in advance of their application;\nand\n49 C.F.R. § 195.446(j)(1) (Item 7) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to maintain\nrecords that demonstrated compliance with the requirements of this section.\nEni presented information in its Response showing that it had taken certain actions to address the\ncited items. If OPS finds a violation of any of these items in a subsequent inspection,\nRespondent may be subject to future enforcement action.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.243, Respondent may submit a Petition for Reconsideration of this Final\nOrder to the Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey\nAvenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590, with a copy sent to the Office of\nChief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. The written petition must be received no later than\n20 days after receipt of the Final Order by Respondent. Any petition submitted must contain a\n\n\n\nstatement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.243. The terms of\nthe order, including corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator, upon\nrequest, grants a stay.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\nApril 26, 2023\n___________________________________ __________________________\nAlan K. Mayberry Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":15594}