{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 52023037NOPV","title":"DCOR, LLC — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"current","official":true,"published_on":"2023-09-18","effective_on":null,"summary":"OPEN notice of probable violation citing 195.402(a), 195.403(a), 195.403(b), 195.403(c), 195.452(i)(3), 195.452(l)(1)(ii), 195.589(c).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023037nopv.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023037nopv.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-52023037nopv","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/52023037NOPV","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving DCOR, LLC. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.402(a),  195.403(a),  195.403(b),  195.403(c),  195.452(i)(3),  195.452(l)(1)(ii),  195.589(c). The case was opened on 2023-09-18 and is reported as open. Proposed civil penalty: $81,900. Assessed civil penalty: $76,000. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n52023037NOPV_Final Order_08062025_(22-232625).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023037NOPV/52023037NOPV_Final%20Order_08062025_(22-232625).pdf\n\n52023037NOPV_Final Order_08062025_(22-232625)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023037NOPV/52023037NOPV_Final%20Order_08062025_(22-232625)_text.pdf\n\n52023037NOPV_Operator Response to Notice_11072023_(22-232625).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023037NOPV/52023037NOPV_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_11072023_(22-232625).pdf\n\n52023037NOPV_PCP PCO_09182023_(22-232625).pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023037NOPV/52023037NOPV_PCP%20PCO_09182023_(22-232625).pdf\n\n52023037NOPV_PCP PCO_09182023_(22-232625)_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/52023037NOPV/52023037NOPV_PCP%20PCO_09182023_(22-232625)_text.pdf\n\n52023037NOPV_Final Order_08062025_(22-232625)_text.pdf\n\nAugust 6, 2025\nVIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO: sknight@dcorllc.com\nScott Knight\nVice President - HSE & Regulatory\nDCOR, LLC\n1000 Town Center Drive, Suite 600\nOxnard, California 93036\nRe: CPF No. 5-2023-037-NOPV\nDear Mr. Knight:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case to DCOR, LLC. It\nwithdraws four of the allegations of violation, makes other findings of violation, assesses a\nreduced civil penalty of $76,000, and specifies actions that need to be taken by DCOR, LLC\nto comply with the pipeline safety regulations. When the civil penalty has been paid and the\nterms of the compliance order completed, as determined by the Director, Western Region, this\nenforcement action will be closed. Service of the Final Order by e-mail is effective upon the\ndate of transmission and acknowledgement of receipt as provided under 49 CFR § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nLinda Daugherty\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Dustin Hubbard, Director, Western Region, Office of Pipeline Safety, PHMSA\nHeather Carreno, Regulatory Compliance Coordinator, DCOR, LLC,\nhcarreno@dcorllc.com\nAndrew Kendrick, Director of Pipelines, DCOR, LLC, akendrick@dcorllc.com\nErwin Molina, Pipeline Compliance Coordinator, DCOR, LLC, emolina@dcorllc.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 )\nDCOR, LLC, ) CPF No. 5-2023-037-NOPV\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nFrom September 12 through September 16, 2022, 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 inspection of DCOR, LLC’s (DCOR or Respondent)\npipeline system that serves the Platform Gina, Platform Gilda, and the Mandalay Onshore\nSeparation Facility (MOSF) in Ventura, California. DCOR operates hazardous liquid pipeline\nfacilities in California and Texas.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Western Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated September 18, 2023, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil\nPenalty, and Proposed Compliance Order (Notice). In accordance with 49 CFR § 190.207, the\nNotice proposed finding that Respondent had committed seven violations of 49 CFR Part 195,\nproposed assessing a civil penalty of $81,900, and proposed ordering Respondent to take certain\nmeasures to correct the alleged violations.\nAfter requesting and receiving an extension of time to respond, DCOR responded to the Notice\nby letter dated November 7, 2023 (Response). Respondent contested several of the alleged\nviolations, offered additional information in response to each of the allegations in the Notice, and\nrequested reconsideration of the proposed civil penalty. Respondent did not request a hearing\nand therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDINGS OF VIOLATION\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR Part 195, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.402(a), which states:\n§ 195.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies.\n(a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline\n\n\n\nsystem a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations\nand maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and\nemergencies. This manual shall be reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15\nmonths, but at least once each calendar year, and appropriate changes made\nas necessary to insure that the manual is effective. This manual shall be\nprepared before initial operations of a pipeline system commence, and\nappropriate parts shall be kept at locations where operations and\nmaintenance activities are conducted.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.402(a) by failing to follow a manual\nof written procedures for each pipeline system for conducting normal operations and\nmaintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies on two occasions.\nSpecifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent failed to liaison with fire, police, and other\nappropriate public officials in accordance with its procedure HL3.04, section 5.1.2. In addition,\nthe Notice alleged that Respondent failed to inspect a valve in accordance with its procedures\nHL7.01, section 4.\nIn its Response, DCOR contested Item 1, explaining that the required activities were performed\nand documented, but that during the 2022 PHMSA inspection DCOR’s newly appointed\nintegrity manager was unaware of the location of the requested compliance records and did not\nhave access to the online portal containing certain other compliance records. DCOR submitted\nthe responsive records in question as attachments to the Response.\nIn a recommendation for final action submitted pursuant to section 190.209(b)(7), the Director\nrecommended withdrawing the alleged violation of section 195.402(a).\nAfter a review of the responsive records, I find that DCOR did not violate section 195.402(a).\nBased upon the foregoing, I hereby order that Item 1 be withdrawn.\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.403(a), which states:\n§ 195.403 Emergency response training.\n(a) Each operator shall establish and conduct a continuing training\nprogram to instruct emergency response personnel to:\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.403(a) by failing to conduct a\ncontinuing training program to instruct emergency response personnel. Specifically, the Notice\nalleged that DCOR failed to provide the 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 records to demonstrate\ncompliance with section 195.403(a).\nIn its Response, DCOR contested Item 2, explaining that the required activities were performed\nand documented, but that during the 2022 PHMSA inspection DCOR’s newly appointed\nintegrity manager was unable to locate the requested compliance records. DCOR submitted\nresponsive emergency response training records as attachments to the Response. DCOR also\nstated it was in the process of building additional pipeline-specific emergency response training\nto include in its operator qualification program.\n\n\n\nIn a recommendation for final action submitted pursuant to section 190.209(b)(7), the Director\nrecommended withdrawing the alleged violation of section 195.403(a).\nAfter a review of the responsive emergency response training records, I find that DCOR did not\nviolate section 195.403(a). Based upon the foregoing, I hereby order that Item 2 be withdrawn.\nItem 3: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.403(b), which states:\n§ 195.403 Emergency response training.\n(a) . . . .\n(b) At the intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each\ncalendar year, each operator shall:\n(1) Review with personnel their performance in meeting the objectives\nof the emergency response training program set forth in paragraph (a) of\nthis section; and\n(2) Make appropriate changes to the emergency response training\nprogram as necessary to ensure that it is effective.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.403(b) by failing, at intervals not\nexceeding 15 months but at least once each calendar year, to review with personnel their\nperformance in meeting the objectives of the emergency response training program set forth in\nsection 195.403(a), and to make appropriate changes to the emergency response training program\nas necessary to ensure that it is effective. Specifically, the Notice alleged that DCOR failed to\nprovide the 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 records to demonstrate compliance with section\n195.403(b).\nIn its Response, DCOR contested Item 3, explaining that during the inspection DCOR’s integrity\nmanager was unaware of the location of the requested compliance records. DCOR explained\nthat it uses Compliance Form 17.01, which encompasses the Emergency Response Plan (ERP)\nannual drill, ERP review, and the verification of supervisor knowledge. With the Response,\nDCOR submitted records to demonstrate that it had reviewed with its personnel their\nperformance in meeting the objectives of the emergency response training program from 2019 to\n2021.\nAfter examining the additional information submitted with the Response, I find that the\ninformation demonstrates that DCOR did not violate section 195.403(b) in 2019, 2020, and\n2021. Respondent did not provide records for 2022; however, I note that the PHMSA inspection\nconcluded in September 2022, or before the end of the 2022 calendar year period in which\nRespondent had to perform the required activity.\nBased upon the foregoing, I find that DCOR did not violate section 195.403(b), and hereby\nwithdraw Item 3. Respondent is warned that failure to maintain records demonstrating\ncompliance with applicable Federal pipeline safety regulations may result in potential future\nenforcement.\n\n\n\nItem 4: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.403(c), which states:\n§ 195.403 Emergency response training.\n(a) . . . .\n(c) Each operator shall require and verify that its supervisors maintain a\nthorough knowledge of that portion of the emergency response procedures\nestablished under [§] 195.402 for which they are responsible to ensure\ncompliance.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.403(c) by failing to require and\nverify its supervisors maintain a thorough knowledge of that portion of the emergency response\nprocedures for which they are responsible to ensure compliance. Specifically, the Notice alleged\nthat DCOR failed to provide records for 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 demonstrating compliance\nwith section 195.403(c).\nIn its Response, DCOR contested Item 4, explaining that it uses Compliance Form 17.01, which\nencompasses the ERP annual drill, ERP review, and verification of supervisor knowledge.\nDCOR submitted records with the Response to demonstrate that it required and verified its\nsupervisors maintain a thorough knowledge of that portion of the emergency response\nprocedures for which they are responsible to ensure compliance for 2019, 2020, and 2021.\nDCOR did not provide compliant records for 2022.\nAfter examining the additional information provided in the Response, I find that the information\ndemonstrates that DCOR did not violate section 195.403(c) in 2019, 2020, and 2021. I note that\nthe inspection concluded in September 2022, or before the end of the 2022 calendar year period\nin which Respondent had to perform the required activity.\nBased upon the foregoing, I find that DCOR did not violate section 195.403(c), and hereby\nwithdraw Item 4. Respondent is warned that failure to maintain records demonstrating\ncompliance with applicable Federal pipeline safety regulations may result in potential future\nenforcement.\nItem 5: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.452(i)(3), which states:\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n(i) What preventive and mitigative measures must an operator take to\nprotect the high consequence area? –\n(1) . . . .\n(3) Leak detection. An operator must have a means to detect leaks on its\npipeline system. An operator must evaluate the capability of its leak\ndetection means and modify, as necessary, to protect the high consequence\narea. An operator’s evaluation must, at least, consider, the following\nfactors—length and size of the pipeline, type of product carried, the\npipeline’s proximity to the high consequence area, the swiftness of leak\ndetection, location of nearest response personnel, leak history, and risk\n\n\n\nassessment results.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.452(i)(3) by failing to evaluate the\ncapability of its leak detection means and modify, as necessary, to protect the high consequence\narea (HCA). Specifically, the Notice alleged that Respondent failed to provide records to\ndemonstrate the capability of its leak detection system (LDS) had been evaluated at the time of\nPHMSA inspection. Also, the Notice alleged that DCOR failed to provide initial system testing\nrecords of its computational pipeline monitoring (CPM) LDS and records demonstrating the leak\ndetection system’s related components, such as pressure transmitters and the Coriolis meter, had\nbeen calibrated and maintained.\nDCOR did not contest Item 5. DCOR acknowledged in its Response that it had not formally\ndocumented the effectiveness evaluation of its installed LDS (which includes a CPM system).1\nDCOR further explained that it has engaged an integrity management consultant to conduct the\nrequired evaluations, including the Best Available Technology (BAT) assessment.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 CFR §\n195.452(i)(3) by failing to evaluate the capability of its leak detection means and modify, as\nnecessary, to protect the HCA.\nItem 6: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.452(l)(1)(ii), which states:\n§ 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.\n(a) . . . .\n(l) What records must an operator keep to demonstrate compliance?\n(1) An operator must maintain, for the useful life of the pipeline,\nrecords that demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this\nsubpart. At a minimum, an operator must maintain the following records\nfor review during an inspection:\n(i) . . . .\n(ii) Documents to support the decisions and analyses, including any\nmodifications, justifications, deviations and determinations made,\nvariances, and actions taken, to implement and evaluate each element of\nthe integrity management program listed in paragraph (f) of this section.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.452(l)(1)(ii) by failing to maintain\ndocuments to support the decisions and analyses, including any modifications, justifications,\ndeviations, and determinations made, variances, and actions taken, to implement and evaluate\neach element of the integrity management program (IMP) listed in section 195.452(f) on several\noccasions. Specifically, the Notice alleged that:\n(a) DCOR failed to provide records to demonstrate that all available information about the\nintegrity of its entire pipeline and the consequences of a possible failure along the\npipeline had been analyzed as required by section 195.452(f)(3) and (g);\n1 The Response explained DCOR’s CPM system was required to be installed by the U.S. Department of the\nInterior’s Bureau of Safety & Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and the California Coastal Commission.\n\n\n\n(b) DCOR failed to provide records to demonstrate that facilities and pipeline preventive and\nmitigative actions have been considered and implemented as required by\nsection 195.452(f)(6) and (i); and\n(c) DCOR failed to provide records to demonstrate that it had conducted periodic evaluations\nof the effectiveness of its IM Program in assessing and evaluating the integrity of each\npipeline segment and in protecting HCAs as required by section 195.452(f)(7) and (k).\nDCOR contested Item 6. DCOR asserted that it supplied all in-line inspection (ILI) data,\ncorrosion coupon, atmospheric inspection data, and cathodic protection data and emphasized its\nreadiness to provide any other PHMSA-required data upon request. DCOR also acknowledged\nthat at the time of the PHMSA inspection, its integrity team was unable to locate additional\nrecords addressing the required risk assessments and program performance evaluations\ncontemplated in section 195.452. However, since the inspection, DCOR stated it has conducted\nComprehensive Risk Assessments (CRAs) on the Gilda and Gina oil pipelines (incorporating\npreventive and mitigative measures based on the evaluated risks) and included copies of those\nCRAs with its Response. In addition, DCOR explained that since the inspection it has\noverhauled its IMP, including introducing Form IMP 04 (IMP Program Performance Measures),\nand with the Response provided such form as an example.\nAfter evaluating the response material submitted by Respondent, I find that the actions DCOR\ndescribed in its Response have fulfilled the obligations of the compliance actions proposed in the\nNotice for Item 6. However, certain actions described by DCOR in its Response were completed\nafter PHMSA’s 2022 inspection. For instance, DCOR conducted CRAs and developed a new\nIMP form after PHMSA’s inspection. DCOR has not provided documentation demonstrating\nthat prior to, or at the time of inspection, it had maintained in accordance with section\n195.452(l)(1)(ii): records concerning the integrity of its entire pipeline and evidence that the\nconsequences of a potential failure along the pipeline had been analyzed as required by section\n195.452(g); records demonstrating the facilities and pipeline preventative and mitigative actions\nhad been considered and implemented as required by section 195.452(i); and records that it had\nconducted periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of its IMP in assessing and evaluating the\nintegrity of each pipeline segment in protecting high consequence areas as required by section\n195.452(k).\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 CFR §\n195.452(l)(1)(ii) by failing to maintain documents to support the decisions and analyses,\nincluding any modifications, justifications, deviations, and determinations made, variances, and\nactions taken, to implement and evaluate each element of the integrity management program\nlisted in section 195.452(f).\nItem 7: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.589(c), which states:\n§ 195.589 What corrosion control information do I have to maintain?\n(a) . . . .\n(c) You must maintain a record of each analysis, check, demonstration,\n\n\n\nexamination, inspection, investigation, review, survey, and test required by\nthis subpart in sufficient detail to demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion\ncontrol measures or that corrosion requiring control measures does not\nexist. You must retain these records for at least 5 years, except that records\nrelated to §§ 195.569, 195.573(a) and (b), and 195.579(b)(3) and (c) must\nbe retained for as long as the pipeline remains in service.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 CFR § 195.589(c) by failing to maintain records\nto demonstrate the adequacy of corrosion control measures or that corrosion requiring control\nmeasures does not exist. Specifically, the Notice alleged three instances of violation:\n(a) DCOR failed to provide the 2019, 2020, and 2021 records for Platform Gilda, and the\n2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 records for Platform Gina, to demonstrate that offshore\npipeline or portion of the pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere has been inspected\nfor evidence of atmospheric corrosion at least once each calendar year, but with intervals\nnot exceeding 15 months as required by section 195.583(a);\n(b) DCOR failed to provide records to demonstrate that its pipeline or portion of the Gilda’s\nonshore pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere at Mandalay Onshore Separation\nFacility (MOSF) has been inspected for evidence of atmospheric corrosion at least every\n3 calendar years, but with intervals not exceeding 39 months as required by section\n195.583(a). In addition, during the field portion of the inspection, the PHMSA inspector\nobserved and photographed aboveground pipeline and its components that were\ninadvertently buried. These pipelines and components show signs of severe atmospheric\ncorrosion; and\n(c) DCOR failed to provide the 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 records to demonstrate that the\nproper performance of the rectifier has been electrically checked at least six times each\ncalendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 2 ½ months as required by section\n195.573(c).\nDCOR contested Item 7. With respect to Item 7(a), in its Response, DCOR maintained that at\nthe time of the PHMSA inspection, its newly appointed integrity manager was unfamiliar with\nthe location of the requested compliance records. DCOR submitted records responsive to the\nallegations in Item 7(a) with the Response, and explained those records included the external\ncorrosion inspection for Platforms Gilda and Gina from 2019 to 2022.\nAfter reviewing the additional materials provided with DCOR’s Response, I find that DCOR\nfurnished inspection records for Platform Gilda only for 2019, 2022, and 2023, and inspection\nrecords for Platform Gina only addressing 2022. DCOR failed to provide records for Platform\nGilda for 2020 and 2021, and for Platform Gina for 2019, 2020, and 2021. Without these\nrecords, DCOR failed to comply with section 195.583(a), which requires inspection of the\npipeline for evidence of atmospheric corrosion at least once each calendar year, but with\nintervals not exceeding 15 months.\n\n\n\nWith respect to Item 7(b), DCOR stated that at the time of the PHMSA inspection, the newly\nappointed DCOR integrity manager did not know the location of the requested compliance\nrecords. DCOR submitted records responsive to the allegations in Item 7(b) with the Response,\nand explained those records included the atmospheric corrosion inspections for MOSF in 2020\nand 2022 and photos of the excavation performed on the partially buried pipeline. DCOR\nexplained that this section of the pipeline was initially fully buried but became partially exposed\ndue to weathering. The Response discussed that an ultrasonic inspection revealed that the\npipeline was in good condition, except for one anomaly on the 3-inch section. DCOR stated that\nthe scheduled replacement of that “spool piece” was scheduled to be completed.\nAfter conducting a review of the additional materials provided with DCOR’s Response, I find\nthat DCOR provided atmospheric corrosion inspection records indicating it did not violate\nsection 195.583(a) as to Item 7(b). However, DCOR has yet to provide records demonstrating\nthat the corroded section of pipeline and its components that were aboveground as depicted in\nthe photographs accompanying the Notice have been repaired. DCOR stated that the repair was\nscheduled to be completed in December 2023.\nWith respect to Item 7(c), DCOR stated that at the time of the PHMSA inspection, its newly\nappointed integrity manager was unaware of the location of the requested compliance records\naddressing required rectifier readings. DCOR stated that the documents it provided with its\nResponse represent rectifier readings for MOSF from 2019 to 2023 and bi-monthly rectifier and\nbond surveys conducted for 2022 and 2023. DCOR explained that in 2023, the cathodic\nprotection system at MOSF was upgraded via the installation of a new rectifier and anode ground\nbed.\nAfter reviewing the additional materials, I find that DCOR provided bi-monthly rectifier\ninspection records for June 2022, August 2022, and December 2022. However, I find that\nRespondent failed to provide records for 2019, 2020, and 2021, and the remaining months of\n2022. Without these records, DCOR failed to comply with sections 195.573(c) and 195.589(c),\nwhich requires that operators document the proper performance of the rectifier at least six times\neach calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 2 ½ months as required.\nAccordingly, after considering all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 CFR §\n195.589(c) by failing to maintain records demonstrating the adequacy of corrosion control\nmeasures or that corrosion requiring control measures does not exist.\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\n\n\n\nrelated series of violations.2\nIn determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. § 60122 and 49 CFR § 190.225, I\nmust consider the following criteria: the nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation,\nincluding adverse impact on the environment; the degree of Respondent’s culpability; the history\nof Respondent’s prior offenses; any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue\ndoing business; the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations; and self-disclosure or actions to correct a violation prior to discovery by PHMSA.\nIn addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction\nbecause of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice\nproposed a total civil penalty of $81,900 for the violation cited above. Effective May 20, 2025,\nPHMSA revised its proposed civil penalty calculation policy to use the version of the Civil\nPenalty Worksheet in effect when the alleged violation occurred. The new policy reduces the\ntotal proposed civil penalty in this case to $76,000.\nItem 6: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $81,900 for Respondent’s violation of 49 CFR §\n195.452(l)(1)(ii) for failing to maintain documents to support the decisions and analyses,\nincluding any modifications, justifications, deviations and determinations made, variances, and\nactions taken, to implement and evaluate each element of its IMP as required by section\n195.452(f). The new policy for calculating a proposed civil penalty reduces the proposed civil\npenalty for this item to $76,000.\nIn its Response, DCOR requested reconsideration of the proposed civil penalty. As noted above,\nthe new policy for calculating a proposed civil penalty reduces the proposed civil penalty by\n$5,900 to $76,000. However, DCOR failed to present any evidence justifying a further reduction\nin the penalty. No information was presented indicating any of the statutory civil penalty\nassessment factors were incorrect or should be reduced. With respect to Respondent’s\nremediation of the violation, I note that the correction of pipeline safety violations after they\nhave been identified by PHMSA during an inspection, as occurred in this case, is not a basis to\nreduce a civil penalty.3 Therefore, I find no reason to further reduce the penalty.\nAccordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess\nRespondent a reduced civil penalty of $76,000 for violation of 49 CFR § 195.452(l)(1)(ii).\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days after receipt of this Final Order.\nFederal regulations (49 CFR § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer\nthrough the Federal Reserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S.\nTreasury. Detailed instructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire\ntransfers should be directed to: Financial Operations Division (AMK-325), Federal Aviation\nAdministration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 S MacArthur Blvd, Oklahoma City,\nOklahoma 79169. The Financial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8845.\n2 These amounts are adjusted annually for inflation. See 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts.\n3 See, e.g., Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, Final Order, CPF No. 3-2022-061-NOPV, 2023 WL 3884045 (June 6,\n2023) (available at https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/cases?opened_yr=2022).\n\n\n\nFailure to pay the civil penalty will result in accrual of interest at the current annual rate in\naccordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3717, 31 CFR § 901.9 and 49 CFR § 89.23. Pursuant to those same\nauthorities, a late penalty charge of six percent (6%) per annum will be charged if payment is not\nmade within 110 days of service. Furthermore, failure to pay the civil penalty may result in\nreferral of the matter to the Attorney General for appropriate action in a district court of the\nUnited States.\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Items 1 through 7 in the Notice for\nviolations of 49 CFR §§ 195.402(a), 195.403(a), 195.403(b), 195.403(c), 195.452(i)(3),\n195.452(l)(1)(ii), and 195.589(c), respectively. Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who\nengages in the transportation of hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is\nrequired to comply with the applicable safety standards established under chapter 601.\nAs discussed above, Items 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the Notice have been withdrawn. Therefore, the\ncompliance terms proposed in the Notice for those Items are not included in this Final Order.\nWith regard to the violation of section 195.452(l)(1)(ii) described in Item 6, as discussed above,\nthe Director has indicated that DCOR has already fulfilled the compliance actions proposed in\nthe Notice. Therefore, the compliance terms proposed in the Notice for Item 6 are not included\nin this Final Order.\nWith regard to the violation of section 195.589(c) (Item 7), the Director has indicated that DCOR\nsatisfied the proposed compliance terms in paragraph G(2). Therefore, paragraph G(2) is not\nincluded in this Final Order. In addition, DCOR explained certain sections described in Item\n7(b) of the Notice are not aboveground segments but buried segments that have been exposed via\nweathering over time. Therefore, I amend the proposed compliance terms in paragraph G(4).\nFor the above reasons, the Compliance Order is modified as set forth below.\nPursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 60118(b) and 49 CFR § 190.217, Respondent is ordered\nto take the following actions to ensure compliance with the pipeline safety regulations applicable\nto its operations:\n1. With respect to the violation of section 195.452(i)(3) (Item 5), within 90 days of the\nreceipt of this Final Order, DCOR must test its CPM Leak Detection and related\ncomponents such as pressure transmitters and Coriolis meters to evaluate the capability of\nits leak detection system.\n2. With respect to the violation of section 195.589(c) (Item 7), within 90 days of the\nreceipt of this Final Order, DCOR must:\n(a) Inspect the pipeline or portion of the pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere\nat Platform Gina for evidence of atmospheric corrosion as required by section\n195.583(a);\n\n\n\n(b) For the pipeline segment identified in Exhibit C accompanying the Notice\n(exposed pipe segments exhibiting corrosion at MOSF), inspect such pipe for\ncorrosion pitting using visual inspection tools and conduct repairs if necessary\nand clean and repair all areas that show signs of atmospheric corrosion; and\n(c) Electrically inspect and check the proper performance of the rectifier as\nrequired by section 195.573(c).\n3. Within 30 days of the completion of the above-listed compliance actions, DCOR must\nprovide all relevant records evidencing such to the Director.\nThe Director may grant an extension of time to comply with any of the required items upon a\nwritten request timely submitted by the Respondent and demonstrating good cause for an\nextension.\nPHMSA requests that Respondent maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs\nassociated with fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to the Director. It is\nrequested that these costs be reported in two categories: (1) total cost associated with\npreparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses; and (2) total cost associated with\nreplacements, additions and other changes to pipeline infrastructure.\nFailure to comply with this Order may result in the administrative assessment of civil penalties\nnot to exceed $200,000, as adjusted for inflation (see 49 CFR § 190.223 for adjusted amounts),\nfor each violation for each day the violation continues or in referral to the Attorney General for\nappropriate relief in a district court of the United States.\nUnder 49 CFR § 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\nbrief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other requirements of 49 CFR § 190.243. The filing\nof a petition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The other terms of\nthe order, including any corrective action, remain in effect unless the Associate Administrator,\nupon request, grants a stay. If Respondent submits payment of the civil penalty, the Final Order\nbecomes the final administrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is waived.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nCFR § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nLinda Daugherty Date Issued\nActing Associate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":34224}