Mr. Barry Pearl
Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company
2929 Allen Parkway
P.O. Box 2521
Houston, Texas 77252-2521
RE: CPF No. 4-2002-5009M
Dear Mr. Pearl:
Enclosed is the Order Directing Amendment issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in the above-referenced case. The Order finds that you have addressed the inadequacies in your procedures that were cited in the Notice of Amendment. Your receipt of the Order Directing Amendment constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
This enforcement action is now closed.
Pipeline Compliance Registry
Office of Pipeline Safety
cc: Barbara Carroll
Environmental, Health and Safety
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
In the Matter of )
Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company ) CPF No. 4-2002-5009M
ORDER DIRECTING AMENDMENT
On February 25-26, 2002, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, representatives of the Southwest and Western Regions, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), inspected Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company’s (Respondent’s) integrity management program at Respondent’s facility in Houston, Texas. As a result of the inspection, the Southwestern Regional Director, OPS, issued to Respondent, by letter dated May 13, 2002, a Notice of Amendment (NOA). The NOA alleged inadequacies in Respondent's integrity management program and proposed to require amendment of Respondent's procedures to comply with the requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(b).
Respondent responded to the NOA by letter dated June 13, 2002. Respondent did not contest the NOA and did not request a hearing, consequently Respondent waived its right to one.
The NOA alleged that Respondent’s segment identification procedures did not consider spill migration via overland transports or waterways. Respondent explained that it had updated its integrity management program to identify high consequence areas that could be affected through overland conveyances and submitted the revised procedures. The Southwestern Region reviewed the revised procedures. In November 2004, the Region confirmed that Respondent had implemented the amended procedures. Accordingly, I find that Respondent’s original integrity management program procedures as described in the NOA were inadequate to ensure safe operation of its pipeline system. However, based on the results of the Region’s review, I find that Respondent has corrected the identified inadequacies. Respondent need not take any further action with respect to the matters in this case.
The terms and conditions of this Order Directing Amendment are effective upon receipt.
Stacey Gerard Date Issued
for Pipeline Safety