{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 52023011NOPV","title":"BETA OFFSHORE — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"current","official":true,"published_on":"2023-04-06","effective_on":null,"summary":"OPEN notice of probable violation citing 195.401(a), 195.402(a), 195.446(a), 195.446(b)(5), 195.446(d)(2), 195.446(d)(3), 195.446(h), 195.505(b), 195.52(a)(4), 195.52(a)(5), 195.54(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023011nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023011nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023011nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/52023011NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving BETA OFFSHORE. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.401(a),  195.402(a),  195.446(a),  195.446(b)(5),  195.446(d)(2),  195.446(d)(3),  195.446(h),  195.505(b),  195.52(a)(4),  195.52(a)(5),  195.54(a). The case was opened on 2023-04-06 and is reported as open. Proposed civil penalty: $3,389,734. Assessed civil penalty: $2,000,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n52023011NOPV_Consent Agreement and Order_12162025_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_12162025_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_Consent Agreement and Order_12162025_(21-225379)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Order_12162025_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_Operator Post-Hearing Submission_06072024_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_Operator%20Post-Hearing%20Submission_06072024_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_Operator Pre-Hearing Submission (Part 1)_04292024_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_Operator%20Pre-Hearing%20Submission%20(Part%201)_04292024_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_Operator Pre-Hearing Submission (Part 2) _04292024_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_Operator%20Pre-Hearing%20Submission%20(Part%202)%20_04292024_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_Operator RtN and RfH and Request Inf Conf_05122023_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_Operator%20RtN%20and%20RfH%20and%20Request%20Inf%20Conf_05122023_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PCP PCO_04062023_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_PCP%20PCO_04062023_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PCP PCO_04062023_(21-225379)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_PCP%20PCO_04062023_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PHC Hearing Rescheduled_02202024_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Rescheduled_02202024_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PHC Hearing Rescheduled_02202024_(21-225379)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Rescheduled_02202024_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PHC Hearing Scheduled_07132023_(21-225379).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Scheduled_07132023_(21-225379).pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PHC Hearing Scheduled_07132023_(21-225379)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023011NOPV/52023011NOPV_PHC%20Hearing%20Scheduled_07132023_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\n52023011NOPV_PHC Hearing Rescheduled_02202024_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\nDate: February 20, 2024\nFrom: Larry White\nTo: File\nRe: Continuance of Hearing, Amplify Energy/Beta Offshore\nCPF No. 5-2023-011-NOPV\nBy letter dated February 13, 2024, Alexandra Iorio, Counsel for OPS Western Region, and James\nCurry, Counsel for Amplify Energy/Beta Offshore, submitted a joint request for a continuance of\nthe hearing previously scheduled for March 6, 2024. The request explained that the parties were\nengaged in settlement discussions to resolve the case which would make a hearing unnecessary and\nadditional time was needed to conclude the negotiations due to the complexity of the case.\nI granted the request for a continuance until May 8, 2024 which will be the new hearing date if\nresolution by consent agreement is not completed by that time.\n\n52023011NOPV_PHC Hearing Scheduled_07132023_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\nJuly 13, 2023\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: chris.keegan@kirkland.com.com and\ndustin.hubbard@dot.gov\nMr. Christopher W. Keegan, Esq.\nCounsel for Amplify Energy Corporation\nKirkland & Ellis, LLP\n555 California Street\nSan Francisco, CA 94104\nMr. Dustin Hubbard\nDirector, Western Region\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n12300 W. Dakota Avenue, Suite 110\nLakewood, CO 80228\nRe: Notice of Hearing, Amplify Energy Corporation\nCPF No. 5-2023-011-NOPV\nDear Mr. Keegan and Mr. Hubbard:\nIn accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.211, an informal hearing will be held regarding the Notice of\nProbable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty, and Proposed Compliance Order issued by the Pipeline\nand Hazardous Materials Safety Administration in the above-referenced case. The hearing will take\nplace on March 6th, 2024, beginning at 8:30 a.m. Mountain Time.\nThe hearing will be held at the PHMSA Western Region office, 12300 W. Dakota Ave, Suite 110,\nLakewood, CO 80228. Upon arrival at the building, attendees will be required to present photo\nidentification to security personnel. A contact phone number for the day of the hearing is (720) 963-\n3160.\nAt least 10 calendar days prior to the hearing (or by February 26, 2024), both parties must submit and\nexchange any additional written materials they intend to present at the hearing and the name and email\naddress of each attendee. This information should be provided electronically. Materials not submitted\nby this date may be excluded. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.\nSincerely,\nLarry White\nPresiding Official\n\n\n\ncc: Mr. Dan Steward, Vice President, Beta Offshore, Amplify Energy Corporation,\ndan.steward@amplifyenergy.com\nMs. Kathleen Maitland, Counsel, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety,\nkathleen.maitland@dot.gov\n\n52023011NOPV_Consent Agreement and Order_12162025_(21-225379)_text.pdf\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nDecember 16, 2025\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: dan.furbee@amplifyenergy.com\nMr. Daniel Furbee\nChief Executive Officer\nAmplify Energy Corp.\n111 Ocean Boulevard, Suite 1240\nLong Beach, California 90802\nCPF No. 5-2023-011-NOPV\nDear Mr. Furbee:\nEnclosed please find a Consent Order incorporating the terms of the Consent Agreement between\nthe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Beta Offshore, which\nwas executed on December 10, 2025. Service of the Consent Order and Consent Agreement by\nelectronic mail is deemed effective upon the date of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt,\nor as otherwise provided under 49 CFR § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nLinda Daugherty\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure: Consent Order and Consent Agreement\ncc: Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nBrianne Kurdock, Esq., Babst Calland bkurdock@babstcalland.com\nEric Willis, General Counsel, Amplify Energy Corp., eric.willis@amplifyenergy.com\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 )\nBeta Offshore ) CPF No. 5-2023-011-NOPV\na subsidiary of Amplify Energy Corp. )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nCONSENT ORDER\nBy letter dated April 6, 2023, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n(PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), issued a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed\nCivil Penalty and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice) to Beta Offshore, a subsidiary of\nAmplify Energy Corp. (Beta or Respondent).\nIn response to the Notice, Respondent requested a hearing on Items 1 through 9 (Response). On\nMay 8, 2024, Respondent and PHMSA (the Parties) participated in an administrative hearing in\nLakewood, Colorado before PHMSA’s Presiding Official. Prior to and continuing after the\nhearing, the parties participated in settlement discussions regarding the issues in dispute. As a\nresult of those discussions, as explained in more detail below, the Parties have agreed to a\nConsent Agreement by which PHMSA makes findings of violation, includes modified\ncompliance terms, acknowledges corrective actions by Respondent, and assesses a civil penalty\nof $2,000,000.\nAccordingly, the Consent Agreement is hereby approved and incorporated by reference into this\nConsent Order. Beta is hereby ordered to comply with the terms of the Consent Agreement\npursuant to its terms. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., failure to comply with this Consent\nOrder may result in the assessment of civil penalties as set forth in 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49\nCFR § 190.223, or in referral to the Attorney General for appropriate relief in a district court of\nthe United States.\nThe terms and conditions of this Consent Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 CFR § 190.5.\n_____________________ ______________________\nLinda Daugherty Date Issued\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\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 )\nBeta Offshore ) CPF No. 5-2023-011-NOPV\na subsidiary of Amplify Energy Corp. )\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nCONSENT AGREEMENT\nOn October 1, 2021, the San Pedro Bay Pipeline (the Pipeline), operated by Beta Operating\nCompany, LLC d/b/a Beta Offshore (Beta or Respondent), a subsidiary of Amplify Energy Corp.,\nruptured spilling approximately 588 barrels of crude oil into Federal waters off the coast of\nSouthern California (the Accident).\n1 The Pipeline is a 17.79-mile, 16-inch hazardous liquid\ntransmission pipeline that transports crude oil from Platform Elly, an offshore oil platform in the\nSan Pedro Bay in Federal waters off the coast of Southern California, to Beta Pump Station in\nLong Beach, California. The Pipeline runs along the seafloor until reaching the Long Beach\nbreakwater, where it is buried.\nOn October 3 through 22, 2021, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives of the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), responded\nto the failure site to conduct an accident investigation.\nAs a result of that investigation, on April 6, 2023, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director),\nissued a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Compliance Order and Proposed Civil Penalty\n(Notice) to the Respondent. In accordance with 49 CFR § 190.207, PHMSA alleged that Beta had\ncommitted 9 violations of 49 CFR Part 195 (Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9) related to its response\nto the Accident. PHMSA proposed a total civil penalty of $3,389,734 for these Items and proposed\nordering Respondent to take certain measures to correct the alleged violations. The Notice also\nincluded a warning item (Item 10).\n1 The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the accident and determined that the initial cause of the\nspill was the result of anchors dragged by two cargo ships that hit the pipeline on the seafloor. National\nTransportation Safety Board, “Anchor Strike of Underwater Pipeline and Eventual Crude Oil Release,” MIR-24-01,\nSecs. 3.1.4 & 3.1.5 (Oct. 1, 2021)(Finding that “[a]s a result of the winds and seas generated by a strong cold front,\nthe containerships Beijing and MSC Danit dragged anchor, and the anchors struck, displaced, and damaged the San\nPedro Bay Pipeline…[a]lthough both ships’ anchors struck, damaged, and displaced the pipeline, the MSC Danit\nanchor’s contact with the San Pedro Bay Pipeline was the initiating event that led to the eventual crude oil release.”).\n\n\n\nOn May 12, 2023, Beta filed a timely response to the Notice. Beta contested the allegations and\nrequested an informal conference, or alternatively, an administrative hearing.\nOn November 14, 2023, Respondent and PHMSA (collectively, the Parties) participated in an\ninformal conference in Lakewood, Colorado to discuss the issues. The parties were unable to\nresolve the issues at that time.\nOn May 8, 2024, the Parties participated in an administrative hearing in Lakewood, Colorado\nbefore PHMSA’s Presiding Official (the Hearing). Respondent filed post-hearing briefing on June\n7, 2024, and a reply brief on August 7, 2024. OPS filed a Region Recommendation on July 8,\n2024.\nOn March 27, 2025, the Parties were informed that the Presiding Official that presided over the\nHearing had left the agency, and on May 14, 2025 a new Presiding Official was assigned to this\nmatter.\nOn May 29, 2025, PHMSA revised its Policy for calculating proposed civil penalties in pipeline\nenforcement proceedings.2 Under the new policy, which applies to pending cases such as this one,\nOPS must calculate the penalty using the Civil Penalty Worksheet in effect at the time a violation\noccurs, not when a case is brought. As a result, on June 3, 2025, PHMSA revised the proposed\ncivil penalty in this matter from $3,389,734 to $3,161,934.\nThroughout this proceeding, the Parties have met several times to discuss a potential settlement.\nAs a result of these discussions, the Parties have agreed to resolve this matter via consent order\nand agreement. Having agreed that settlement of this proceeding will avoid further administrative\nproceedings and litigation and will serve the public interest by promoting safety and protection of\nthe environment, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq. and 49 CFR Part 190, and upon consent\nand agreement, the Parties hereby agree as follows:\nI. General Provisions\n1. Respondent acknowledges that as the operator of the pipeline facilities subject to\nthe Notice, Respondent and its referenced pipeline facilities are subject to the jurisdiction of the\nFederal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and the regulations and administrative\norders issued thereunder. For purposes of this Consent Agreement (Agreement), Respondent\nacknowledges that it received proper notice of PHMSA’s action in this proceeding and that the\nNotice states claims upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and\nthe regulations and orders issued thereunder.\n2. After Respondent returns this signed Agreement to PHMSA, the Agency’s\nrepresentative will present it to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, recommending that\nthe Associate Administrator adopt the terms of this Agreement by issuing an administrative order\n2 See Policy for Calculating Proposed Civil Penalties in Pipeline Safety Enforcement Proceedings, May 20, 2025,\navailable at https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulatory-compliance/phmsa-guidance/phmsa-policy-calculating-\nproposed-civil-penalties-pipeline.\n\n\n\n(Consent Order) incorporating the terms of this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement constitute\nan offer of settlement until accepted by the Associate Administrator. Once accepted, the Associate\nAdministrator will issue a Consent Order incorporating the terms of this Agreement.\n3. Respondent consents to the issuance of the Consent Order, and hereby waives any\nfurther procedural requirements with respect to its issuance. Respondent waives all rights to\ncontest the adequacy of notice, or the validity of the Consent Order or this Agreement, including\nall rights to administrative or judicial hearings or appeals, except for the Dispute Resolution\nprovisions set forth herein. Respondent agrees to notify the Presiding Official that the parties have\nresolved this matter via Consent Agreement.\n4. This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon PHMSA and Respondent, its\nofficers, directors, and employees, and its successors, assigns, or other entities or persons\notherwise bound by law. Respondent agrees to provide a copy of this Agreement and any\nincorporated work plans and schedules to all of Respondent’s officers, employees, and agents\nwhose duties might reasonably include compliance with this Agreement.\n5. This Agreement constitutes the final, complete and exclusive agreement and\nunderstanding between the Parties with respect to the settlement embodied in this Agreement. The\nParties acknowledge that there are no representations, agreements or understandings relating to\nsettlement other than those expressly contained in this Agreement, except that the terms of this\nAgreement may be construed by reference to the Notice.\n6. Nothing in this Agreement affects or relieves Respondent of its responsibility to\ncomply with all applicable requirements of the Federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. § 60101, et\nseq., and the regulations and orders issued thereunder. Nothing in this Agreement alters PHMSA's\nright of access, entry, inspection, and information gathering or PHMSA's authority to bring\nenforcement actions against Respondent pursuant to the Federal pipeline safety laws, the\nregulations and orders issued thereunder, or any other provision of Federal or State law.\n7. For all transfers of ownership or operating responsibility of Respondent’s pipeline\nsystem referenced herein, Respondent will provide a copy of this Agreement to the prospective\ntransferee at least 30 days prior to such transfer. Respondent will provide written notice of the\ntransfer to the Director no later than 60 days after the transfer occurs.\n8. This Agreement does not waive or modify any Federal, State, or local laws or\nregulations that are applicable to Respondent’s pipeline systems. This Agreement is not a permit,\nor a modification of any permit, under any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations. Respondent\nremains responsible for achieving and maintaining compliance with all applicable Federal, State,\nand local laws, regulations and permits.\n9. This Agreement does not create rights in, or grant any cause of action to, any third\nparty, not party to this Agreement. The U.S. Department of Transportation is not liable for any\ninjuries or damages to persons or property arising from acts or omissions of Respondent or its\nofficers, employees, or agents carrying out the work required by this Agreement. Respondent\nagrees to hold harmless the U.S. Department of Transportation, its officers, employees, agents,\n\n\n\nand representatives from any and all causes of action arising from any acts or omissions of\nRespondent or its contractors in carrying out any work required by this Agreement.\n10. Respondent neither admits nor denies any allegations or conclusions in the Notice.\nRespondent agrees for purposes of this Agreement to accept the allegations in the Notice as\nfindings of violations and to comply with the terms of this Agreement.\n11. Except as set forth herein, this Agreement does not constitute a finding of violation\nof any other federal law or regulation and may not be used in any civil proceeding of any kind as\nevidence or proof of any fact, fault or liability, or as evidence of a violation of any law, rule,\nregulation, or requirement, except in a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this Agreement.\nII. Findings of Violation\n12. Item 1 - 49 CFR § 195.52(a): The Notice alleged Beta failed to notify the National\nResponse Center in accordance with 195.52(a) at the earliest practicable moment following\ndiscovery, but no later than one hour after confirmed discovery of a failure that resulted in oil\nbeing released into the San Pedro Bay. For purposes of settlement, Respondent does not contest\nthe allegation of violation as alleged in the Notice. As such, PHMSA finds a violation of 49 CFR\n§ 195.52(a).\n13. Item 2 – 49 CFR § 195.401(a): The Notice alleged that Beta operated its pipeline\nat a level of safety that was lower than that required by Part 195, Subpart F – Operations and\nMaintenance, and the procedures required to be established under 49 CFR § 195.402(a). For\npurposes of settlement, Respondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the\nNotice. As such, PHMSA finds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.401(a).\n14. Item 3 – 49 CFR § 195.402(a): The Notice alleged Beta failed to follow a manual\nof written procedures for each pipeline system for conducting normal operations and maintenance\nactivities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies. For purposes of settlement,\nRespondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the Notice. As such, PHMSA\nfinds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.402(a).\n15. Item 4 – 49 CFR § 195.446(a): The Notice alleged Beta failed to follow its written\ncontrol room management (CRM) procedures that implement the requirements of § 195.446. For\npurposes of settlement, Respondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the\nNotice. As such, PHMSA finds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.446(a).\n16. Item 5 – 49 CFR § 195.446(a): The Notice alleged Beta failed to follow its CRM\nprocedure as it related to the requirement to monitor the content and volume of general activity\nbeing directed to and required of each controller at least once each calendar year, but at intervals\nnot exceeding 15 months. For purposes of settlement, Respondent does not contest the allegation\nof violation as alleged in the Notice. As such, PHMSA finds a violation of 49 CF.R. § 195.446(a).\n17. Item 6 – 49 CFR § 195.446(b)(5): The Notice alleged that Beta did not define in\nits CRM procedures the roles, responsibilities and qualifications of others who have the authority\n\n\n\nto direct or supersede the specific technical actions of controllers. For purposes of settlement,\nRespondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the Notice. As such, PHMSA\nfinds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.446(b)(5).\n18. Item 7 – 49 CFR § 195.446(d)(3): The Notice alleged Beta failed to educate\ncontrollers and supervisors in fatigue mitigation strategies and how off-duty activities contribute\nto fatigue, and train controllers and supervisors to recognize the effects of fatigue. For purposes\nof settlement, Respondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the Notice. As\nsuch, PHMSA finds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.446(d)(3).\n19. Item 8 – 49 CFR § 195.446(h): The Notice alleged Beta failed to provide training\nto its controllers to carry out the roles and responsibilities defined by the operator. For purposes of\nsettlement, Respondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the Notice. As\nsuch, PHMSA finds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.446(h).\n20. Item 9 – 49 CFR § 195.505(b): The Notice alleged Beta failed to ensure a thorough\nevaluation that individuals performing covered tasks were qualified. For purposes of settlement,\nRespondent does not contest the allegation of violation as alleged in the Notice. As such, PHMSA\nfinds a violation of 49 CFR § 195.505(b).\n21. Items 1 through 9, will be considered by PHMSA as prior offenses in any future\nPHMSA enforcement action taken against Respondent for the five (5)-year period following the\nEffective Date of this Agreement.\nIII. Warning Item:\n22. Item 10 – 49 CFR § 195.54(a): The Notice alleged Beta failed to file an accident\nreport on DOT Form 7000-1 as soon as practicable but not later than 30 days after the discovery\nof the Failure. This Item was brought as a warning item and does not constitute a finding of\nviolation. If OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may\nbe subject to future enforcement action.\nIV. Civil Penalty:\n23. Item 1: PHMSA proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $50,200. On June 3,\n2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $46,600 as part of a change in its Civil Penalty\nPolicy. Respondent has agreed to pay the proposed civil penalty of $46,600 for this Item.\n24. Item 2: PHMSA proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $225,134. Respondent\nhas agreed to pay the proposed civil penalty of $225,134 for this Item.\n25. Item 3: PHMSA proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $1,526,800. On June 3,\n2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $1,416,900 as part of a change in its Civil Penalty\nPolicy. For purposes of settlement, PHMSA agrees to reduce the number of instances of violation\nand further adjust the penalty for this Item as justice may require. As a result, the penalty is\n\n\n\nreduced to $747,633. Respondent has agreed to pay a reduced civil penalty in the amount of\n$747,633 for this Item.\n26.\nItem 4: PHMSA proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $1,228,900. On June 3,\n2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $1,140,400 as part of the agency's modifications\nto its Civil Penalty Policy. For the purposes of settlement, PHMSA agrees to reduce the number\nof instances of violation and further adjust the penalty for this Item as justice may require. As a\nresult, the penalty is reduced to $747,633. Respondent has agreed to pay a civil penalty in the\namount of $747,633 for this Item.\n27. Item 5: The Notice proposed assessing a civil penalty in the amount of $50,200.\nOn June 3, 2025, PHIMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $46,600 as part of a change in its Civil\nPenalty Policy. Respondent has agreed to pay the proposed civil penalty of $46,600 for this Item.\n28. Item 6: The Notice proposed assessing a civil penalty in the amount of $50,200.\nOn June 3, 2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $46,600 as part of a change in its Civil\nPenalty Policy. Respondent has agreed to pay the proposed civil penalty of $46,600 for this Item.\n29. Item 7: The Notice proposed assessing a civil penalty in the amount of $50,200.\nOn June 3, 2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $46,600 as part of a change in its Civil\nPenalty Policy. Respondent has agreed to pay the proposed civil penalty of $46,600 for this Item.\n30. Item 8: The Notice proposed assessing a civil penalty in the amount of $81,900.\nOn June 3, 2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $76,000 as part of a change in its Civil\nPenalty Policy. For the purposes of settlement, PHMSA agrees to reduce the number of instances\nof violation for this Item. As a result, the penalty is reduced to $46,600. Respondent has agreed\nto pay the proposed civil penalty of $46,600 for this Item.\n31. Item 9: The Notice proposed assessing a civil penalty in the amount of $126,200.\nOn June 3, 2025, PHMSA reduced the proposed penalty to $117,100 as part of a change in its Civil\nPenalty Policy. For the purposes of settlement, PHMSA agrees to reduce the number of instances\nof violation for this Item. As a result, the penalty is reduced to $46,600. Respondent has agreed\nto pay the proposed civil penalty of $46,600 for this Item.\n32. Respondent shall pay an adjusted civil penalty in the amount of $2,000,000, pursuant\nto the payment instructions at 49 CFR § 190.227(a), to be paid in full no later than 20 days from\nthe Effective Date of this Agreement.\nV. Compliance Terms:\n33.\nItems 2 through 5 - PHMSA proposed certain compliance actions to address the\nallegations in Items 2, 3,\n4 and 5 (violations of §§ 195.401(a), 195.402(a), and 195.446(a)).\nRespondent developed revised procedures and submitted them to PHMSA for review. PHMSA\nfinds these revisions acceptable.\n34.\nItem 6 - 49 CFR § 195.446(b)(5): The Notice proposed that Beta must amend its\nprocedure for defining who has the authority and the qualifications to direct or supersede the\n\n\n\nspecific technical actions of a controller and disallow others to direct controller actions. Within 90\ndays of the Effective Date, Beta must provide to PHMSA for review and approval its revised\nprocedures reflecting a detailed process for defining who has authority to direct or supersede the\nspecific technical actions of a controller and disallowing others to direct controller actions (in any\noperating mode), including the circumstances in which he or she may do so, and how this practice\nis documented.\n35. Item 7 – 49 CFR § 195.446(d)(3): The Notice proposed that Beta must provide\ntraining on fatigue risk management to all controllers and supervisors and provide a copy of the\nFatigue Risk Management training materials that will be used to train all controllers and\nsupervisors. Within 120 days of the Effective Date, Beta must provide training on fatigue risk\nmanagement to all controllers and supervisors and submit a copy of the Fatigue Risk Management\ntraining materials to PHMSA.\n36. Item 8 – 49 CFR § 195.446(h): The Notice proposed that Beta must amend its\nCRM Procedure to include the name or title of the training modules that the controllers are required\nto take and how often they have to take the trainings, and a detailed process for providing an\nopportunity for controllers to review relevant procedures in advance of their application for setups\nthat are periodically, but infrequently used. The procedures must include who operationally\ncollaborates with control room personnel, define the frequency of new and recurring team training,\naddress all operational modes and operational collaboration and incorporate lessons learned from\nactual historical events and other oil and gas industry events. Within 90 days of the Effective\nDate, Beta must amend its procedures accordingly and submit the revisions to PHMSA for its\nreview and approval.\n37. Within 90 days of PHMSA’s approval of all amended procedures, Beta must\nprovide a training simulation on all amended procedures to all facility operators, control room\noperators, persons-in-charge, supervisors, superintendents, and safety personnel.\n38. Beta must provide records to PHMSA to demonstrate that this training has been\nconducted within 30 days of training completion.\nVI. Enforcement:\n39. This Agreement is subject to all enforcement authorities available to PHMSA under\n49 U.S.C. § 60101, et seq., and 49 CFR Part 190, including administrative civil penalties under 49\nU.S.C. § 60122, of up to $266,015 per violation for each day the violation continues and referral of\nthe case to the Attorney General for judicial enforcement, if PHMSA determines that Respondent\nis not complying with the terms of this Agreement in accordance with the determinations made by\nthe Director, or in accordance with decisions of the Associate Administrator if resolved pursuant to\nthe Dispute Resolution process herein. The maximum civil penalty amounts are adjusted annually\nfor inflation. See 49 CFR § 190.223. All time frames to complete the compliance terms referenced\nin Section V (Compliance Terms) are automatically incorporated into this Agreement and are\nenforceable in the same manner.\n\n\n\nVII. Review and Approval Process:\n40. With respect to any submission under Section V (Compliance Terms) of this\nAgreement that requires the approval of the Director, the Director may: (a) approve, in whole or\nin part, the submission; (b) approve the submission on specified, reasonable conditions; (c)\ndisapprove, in whole or in part, the submission; or (d) any combination of the foregoing. If the\nDirector approves, approves in part, or approves with conditions, Respondent will take all actions\nas approved by the Director, subject to Respondent’s right to invoke the dispute resolution\nprocedures with respect to any conditions the Director identifies. If the Director disapproves all\nor any portion of the submission, the Director will provide Respondent a written notice of the\ndeficiencies. Respondent will correct all deficiencies within the time specified by the Director and\nresubmit it for approval.\nVIII. Dispute Resolution:\n41. The Director and Respondent will informally attempt to resolve any disputes arising\nunder this Agreement, including any decision of the Director under the terms of Section V\n(Compliance Terms). If Respondent and the Director are unable to informally resolve the dispute\nwithin 15 calendar days after the dispute is first raised, in writing, to the Director, Respondent may\nsubmit a written request for a determination resolving the dispute from the Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety, PHMSA. Such request must be made in writing and provided to the Director,\ncounsel for the Western Region, and to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, no later\nthan 10 calendar days from the 15-day deadline for informal resolution referenced in this\nparagraph. Along with its request, Respondent must provide the Associate Administrator with all\ninformation Respondent believes is relevant to the dispute. Decisions of the Associate\nAdministrator under this paragraph will constitute final agency action. The existence of a dispute\nand PHMSA’s consideration of matters placed in dispute will not excuse, toll, or suspend any term\nor timeframe for completion of any work to be performed under this Agreement during the\npendency of the dispute resolution process.\nIX. Effective Date:\n42. The term “Effective Date,” as used herein, is the date on which the Consent Order\nis issued by the Associate Administrator, PHMSA, incorporating the terms of this Agreement.\nX. Recordkeeping and Information Disclosure:\n43. Unless otherwise required in this Agreement, Respondent agrees to maintain\nrecords demonstrating compliance with all requirements of this Agreement for a period of at least\nfive (5) years following completion of all work to be performed. For any reports, plans, or other\ndeliverables required to be submitted to PHMSA pursuant to this Agreement, Respondent may\nassert a claim of business confidentiality or other protections applicable to the release of\ninformation by PHMSA, covering part or all of the information required to be submitted to\nPHMSA pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 CFR Part 7. Respondent must mark\nthe claim of confidentiality in writing on each page and include a statement specifying the grounds\nfor each claim of confidentiality. PHMSA determines release of any information submitted\n\n\n\npursuant to this Agreement in accordance with 49 CFR Part 7, the Freedom of Information Act, 5\nU.S.C. § 552, DOT and PHMSA policies, and other applicable regulations and Executive Orders.\nXI. Modification:\n44. The terms of this Agreement may be modified by mutual agreement of the Parties.\nSuch modifications must be in writing and signed by both parties.\nXII. Termination:\n45. This Agreement will remain in effect until the Civil Penalty in Section IV and\nCompliance Terms in Section V are deemed satisfied, as determined by the Director. The\nAgreement shall not terminate until the Director confirms, in writing, that the Agreement is\nterminated in accordance with this paragraph. Nothing in this Agreement prevents Respondent\nfrom completing any of the obligations earlier than the deadlines provided for in this Agreement.\nXIII. Ratification:\n46. The Parties’ undersigned representatives certify that they are fully authorized to\nenter into the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to execute and legally bind such party\nto this document.\n47. The Parties hereby agree to all findings, conditions, and terms of this Agreement.\n[Signature Lines on Following Page]\n\n\n\nFor Beta Operating Company, LLC:\n___________________________________\n________________________\nDate\nFor PHMSA:\n________________________________________\nDirector, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety\n________________________\nDate","truncated":false,"body_characters":34960}