{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 120140001","title":"RICHMOND, CITY OF — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2014-02-18","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 192.465(b), 192.747(a).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120140001.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120140001.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-120140001","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/120140001","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving RICHMOND, CITY OF. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 192.465(b),  192.747(a). The case was opened on 2014-02-18 and is reported as closed as of 2014-11-06. Proposed civil penalty: $5,600. Assessed civil penalty: $5,600. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n120140001_Final Order_11062014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140001/120140001_Final%20Order_11062014.pdf\n\n120140001_Final Order_11062014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140001/120140001_Final%20Order_11062014_text.pdf\n\n120140001_NOPV PCP_02182014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140001/120140001_NOPV%20PCP_02182014.pdf\n\n120140001_NOPV PCP_02182014_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140001/120140001_NOPV%20PCP_02182014_text.pdf\n\n120140001_Operator Response to Notice_04022014.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/120140001/120140001_Operator%20Response%20to%20Notice_04022014.pdf\n\n120140001_Final Order_11062014_text.pdf\n\nNOVEMBER 6, 2014\nMr. Robert Steidel\nDirector, Department of Public Utilities\nCity of Richmond\n730 East Broad Street\nRichmond, VA 23219\nRe: CPF No. 1-2014-0001\nDear Mr. Steidel:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of\nviolation and assesses a civil penalty of $5,600. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment of\nthe full penalty amount, by wire transfer, dated April 10, 2014. This enforcement action is now\nclosed. Service of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing,\nor as otherwise provided under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\nThank you for your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nJeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\nEnclosure\ncc: Mr. Byron Coy, Director, Eastern Region, PHMSA, OPS\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN 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____________________________________\n)\nIn the Matter of )\n)\nCity of Richmond, ) CPF No. 1-2014-0001\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nOn November 13, 2012, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a\nrepresentative of the Virginia State Corporation Commission (VA SCC), as agent for the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS), conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of the facilities of the City of Richmond\n(Richmond, City, or Respondent) in Richmond, Virginia.\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Eastern Region, OPS (Director), issued to Respondent,\nby letter dated February 18, 2014, a Notice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty\n(Notice), which also included a warning pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.205. In accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent had violated\n49 C.F.R. § 192.465(b) and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $5,600 for the alleged violation.\nThe warning item required no further action, but warned the operator to correct the probable\nviolation.\nRichmond responded to the Notice by letter dated April 2, 2014 (Response). The company did\nnot contest the allegations of violation and paid the proposed civil penalty of $5,600, as provided\nin 49 C.F.R. § 190.227. Payment of the penalty serves to close the case with prejudice to\nRespondent.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Richmond did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49 C.F.R.\nPart 192, as follows:\nItem 1: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(b), which states:\n\n\n\nC P F N o : 1 - 2 0 1 4 - 0 0 0 1\nP a g e | 2\n§ 192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring.\n(a) ….\n(b) Each cathodic protection rectifier or other impressed current power\nsource must be inspected six times each calendar year, but with intervals\nnot exceeding 2 ½ months, to insure that it is operating.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(b) by failing to inspect each\ncathodic protection rectifier or other impressed current power source six times each calendar\nyear, but with intervals not exceeding 2 ½ months, to insure that it is operating. Specifically, the\nNotice alleged that in 2011 and 2012, the City failed to inspect 21 rectifiers at intervals not\nexceeding 2 ½ months. Respondent did not contest this allegation of violation. Accordingly,\nbased upon a review of all of the evidence, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.465(b) by failing to inspect each cathodic protection rectifier or other impressed current\npower source six times each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 2 ½ months, to\ninsure that it is operating.\nThis finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action\ntaken 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\nrelated series of violations.1 In determining the amount of a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.\n§ 60122 and 49 C.F.R. § 190.225, I must consider the following criteria: the nature,\ncircumstances, and gravity of the violation, including adverse impact on the environment; the\ndegree of Respondent’s culpability; the history of Respondent’s prior offenses; and any effect\nthat the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing business; and the good faith of\nRespondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety regulations. In addition, I may\nconsider the economic benefit gained from the violation without any reduction because of\nsubsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require. The Notice proposed a total\ncivil penalty of $5,600 for the violations cited above.\nItem 1: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $5,600 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 192.465(b), for failing to inspect each cathodic protection rectifier or other impressed current\npower source six times each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 2 ½ months, to\ninsure that it is operating. Richmond neither contested the allegation nor presented any evidence\nor argument justifying a reduction in the proposed penalty. Accordingly, having reviewed the\nrecord and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $5,600 for\nviolation of 49 C.F.R. § 192.465(b).\n1 The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, Pub. L. No. 112-90, § 2(a)(1), 125 Stat.\n1904, January 3, 2012, increased the civil penalty liability for violating a pipeline safety standard to $200,000 per\nviolation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for any related series of violations.\n\n\n\nC P F N o : 1 - 2 0 1 4 - 0 0 0 1\nP a g e | 3\nIn summary, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria for each of the\nItems cited above, I assess Respondent a total civil penalty of $5,600, which has already been\npaid by Respondent.\nWARNING ITEM\nWith respect to Item 2, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 192 but did not propose a\ncivil penalty or compliance order for this item. Therefore, this is considered to be a warning\nitem. The warning was for:\n49 C.F.R. § 192.747(a) (Item 2) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to check and\nservice each valve, the use of which may be necessary for the safe operation of a\ndistribution system, at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each\ncalendar year.\nIf OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent may be subject\nto future enforcement action.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with\n49 C.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":8092}