{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 52023001WL","title":"NOBLE ENERGY, INC. RBU — Warning Letter","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2023-05-03","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED warning letter citing 194.105(a), 194.121(b), 195.420(b), 195.428(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023001wl.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023001wl.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023001wl","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/52023001WL","body":"Warning Letter involving NOBLE ENERGY, INC. RBU. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 194.105(a),  194.121(b),  195.420(b),  195.428(a). The case was opened on 2023-05-03 and is reported as closed as of 2023-05-03. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n52023001WL_Warning Letter_05032023_(22-232527).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023001WL/52023001WL_Warning%20Letter_05032023_(22-232527).pdf\n\n52023001WL_Warning Letter_05032023_(22-232527)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023001WL/52023001WL_Warning%20Letter_05032023_(22-232527)_text.pdf\n\n52023001WL_Warning Letter_05032023_(22-232527)_text.pdf\n\nWARNING LETTER\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: Lisa.Laine@chevron.com\nMay 3, 2023\nMs. Lisa Laine\nSenior HSE Manager\nChevron Corporation\n1400 Smith St.\nHouston, TX 77002\nCPF 5-2023-001-WL\nDear Ms. Laine:\nFrom June 14, 2022 through June 16, 2022, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code\n(U.S.C.), inspected Noble’s Wells Ranch hazardous liquid pipeline system in Weld County,\nColorado.\n1\nAs a result of the inspection, it is alleged that you have committed a probable violation of the\nPipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The items inspected,\nand the probable violations are:\n1. § 195.420 Valve maintenance.\n(a) . . . .\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.\n1 Noble Energy Inc. is a subsidiary of Chevron Corporation.\n\n\n\nNoble failed to inspect each mainline valve to determine that it is functioning properly at\nintervals not exceeding 7 ½ months, but at least twice each calendar year. During the PHMSA\ninspection, Noble was unable to provide a total of eleven Lilli NGL pipeline valve inspection\nrecords for the following 4\" valves within the required 2-year record retention period.\n2\nLauncher NGL Valves (3)\n• Valve ID: 720, S/N: 526708\n• Valve ID: 719, S/N: 526710\n• Valve ID: 721, S/N: 518688\nMidway NGL Valve (1)\n• Valve ID: AABV 1625, S/N: 526712\nReceiver NGL Valves (5)\n• Valve ID: 848, S/N: 626711\n• Valve ID: AABV 850, S/N: 518689\n• Valve ID: N/A, S/N: OBD TX 05-18\n• Valve ID: N/A, S/N: OBD U3 05-18\n• Valve ID: N/A, S/N: OBD U0 05-18\nCTV to Williams NGL Valve (1)\n• Valve ID: NGL 1759, S/N: 05JPS\nFor all Launcher, Midway, and Receiver NGL valves, the inspection interval between April 10,\n2021 and March 7, 2022 was 10.88 months, which exceeded the 7 ½ month requirement in §\n195.420(b).\nThe CTV to Williams NGL 1759 Valve inspection interval between October 29, 2020 and March\n25, 2022, was 16.83 months, which exceeded the 7 ½ month requirement in § 195.420(b),\nshowing that the inspection of this valve was missed for two cycles.\n2. § 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 7½\nmonths, but at least twice each calendar year, inspect and test each pressure limiting\ndevice, relief valve, pressure regulator, or other item of pressure control equipment\nto determine that it is functioning properly, is in good mechanical condition, and is\nadequate from the standpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service\nin which it is used.\nNoble failed inspect and test pressure control equipment on pipelines carrying highly volatile\nliquids (HVLs) at intervals not to exceed 7 ½ months, but at least twice each calendar year, to\ndetermine they were functioning properly, in good mechanical condition, and adequate from a\nstandpoint of capacity and reliability of operation for the service in which they are used.\nSpecifically, during the PHMSA inspection, Noble was unable to provide Overpressure\n2 See 49 C.F.R. §195.404(c)(3) (requiring operators to maintain a record of each inspection or test required by\nSubpart F for at least two years or until the next inspection or test is performed, whichever is longer).\n\n\n\nProtection (OPP) safety inspection and testing records for Lilli NGL Discharge Emergency\nShutdown Systems (ESD), which includes NGL - Pump ESD (PIT S/N: 561083), Midpoint ESD\n(PIT S/N: 2506041), and Receiver ESD (PIT S/N: 2506042).\n3 A total of six inspection records\ncould not be located within the required 2-year record retention period.4\n3. § 194.121 Response plan review and update procedures.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) If a new or different operating condition or information would substantially\naffect the implementation of a response plan, the operator must immediately modify\nits response plan to address such a change and, within 30 days of making such a\nchange, submit the change to PHMSA. Examples of changes in operating conditions\nthat would cause a significant change to an operator's response plan are:\nNoble failed to notify PHMSA of a new or different operating condition or information that\nwould substantially affect the implementation of its response plan within 30 days of making such\na change. Specifically, during the PHMSA inspection, the Operator informed PHMSA that the\nLaramie 12 Inch line section was no longer operated by Noble and was now operated by\nChevron Midstream Services LLC (OPID: 40419). According to § 194.121(b), Noble was\nrequired to notify PHMSA within 30 days of the removal of the Laramie 12 Inch line section\nSince this was noted as having the highest worst case discharge (WCD) volume in the 2018 DJ\nBasin Pipeline Emergency Response Plan (ERP).\n4. § 194.105 Worst case discharge.\n(a) Each operator shall determine the worst case discharge for each of its response\nzones and provide the methodology, including calculations, used to arrive at the\nvolume.\nNoble failed to determine the WCD for each of its response zones, as required. Specifically, the\nline section that was reported in the 2022 DJ Basin Pipeline ERP to have the highest WCD\nvolume was the Tampa 12 Inch, Milton Terminal to Block Valve 1. A review of NPMS data\nshows that the total length for the entire Tampa 12 Inch line segment is about half as long as that\nreported in the ERP. A reduction in the line section length will impact the calculated WCD\nvolume. It is unclear whether this reduction will result in a lower WCD volume compared to\nother line sections listed in the ERP.\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.223, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed\n$257,664 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,576,627 for a\nrelated series of violations. For violation occurring on or after March 21, 2022 and before\nJanuary 6, 2023, the maximum penalty may not exceed $239,142 per violation per day the\nviolation persists, up to a maximum of $2,391,142 for a related series of violations. For violation\n3 No records could be located for calendar year 2020 and the inspection interval between April 28, 2021 and June 6,\n2022.\n4 See 49 C.F.R. §195.404(c)(3) (requiring operators to maintain a record of each inspection or test required by\nSubpart F for at least two years or until the next inspection or test is performed, whichever is longer).\n\n\n\noccurring on or after May 3, 2021 and before March 21, 2022, the maximum penalty may not\nexceed $225,134 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,251,334 for\na related series of violations. For violation occurring on or after January 11, 2021 and before\nMay 3, 2021, the maximum penalty may not exceed $222,504 per violation per day the violation\npersists, up to a maximum of $2,225,034 for a related series of violations. For violation\noccurring on or after July 31, 2019 and before January 11, 2021, the maximum penalty may not\nexceed $218,647 per violation per day the violation persists, up to a maximum of $2,186,465 for\na related 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\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.\nWe have 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\nNoble Energy, Inc. 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 5-2023-001-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, Office of Pipeline Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\ncc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry\nPHP-500 M. Mulligan, M. Flaherty (#22-232527)\nJenifer Wolfe – DOT Compliance Primary, Chevron Corp., Jenifer.Wolfe@chevron.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":9802}