NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY-BROSNAN YARD PIPELINE — Notice of Probable Violation

case documentOfficial PDFCPF_NO_2-2005-6018.pdf#

220056018_Final Order_07262006.pdf, page 1Official PDFU.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 JUL 2 6 2GO6 Mr. Steve McWhorter Assistant Manager, Electrical Engineering & System Norfolk Southern Corporation 1200 Peachtree Street, N.E. (Box: 184) Atlanta, GA 30309 RE: CPF NO. 2-2005-601 8 Dear Mr. McWhorter: Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of violation and assesses a civil penalty of $5,000. I acknowledge receipt of, and accept Norfolk Southern Corporation's payment dated November 14, 2005, in the amount of $5,000 as payment in full of the civil penalty assessed in the Final Order. This case is now closed. This enforcement action closes automatically upon payment. Your receipt of the Final Order constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. 5 190.5. Sincerely, James Reynolds Pipeline Compliance Registry Office of Pipeline Safety Enclosure cc: Ms. Linda Daugherty, Director, OPS Southern Region CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED#

220056018_Final Order_07262006.pdf, page 2DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 In the Matter of ) 1 Norfolk Southern Corporation, 1 CPF No. 2-2005-6018 Respondent. FINAL ORDER Between April 13-15, 2005, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5 601 17, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), Southern Region conducted an on-site pipeline safety inspection of Respondent's Brosnan Yard pipeline facilities and records in Macon, Georgia. As a result of the inspection, the Director, Southern Region, OPS, issued to Respondent, by letter dated October 20,2005, aNotice of Probable Violation and Proposed Civil Penalty (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. 5 190.207, the Notice proposed finding that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. 4 195.420 and proposed assessing a civil penalty of $5,000 for the alleged violation. Respondent failed to respond within 30 days after it had received the Notice. Respondent's failure to respond constitutes a waiver of Respondent's right to contest the allegations in the Notice and authorizes the entry of this Final Order.. FINDINGS OF VIOLATION Uncontested Respondent did not contest the alleged violation of 5 195.420(b) in the Notice. Accordingly, I find that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. Part 195, as more fully described in the Notice: 49 C.F.R. 5 195.420(b)--failure to inspect each mainline valve to determine that it is functioning properly at intervals not exceeding 7% months, but at least twice each calendar year. Respondent only inspected its five (5) main line valves during calendar years 2003 and 2004. This finding of violation will be considered a prior offense in any subsequent enforcement action taken against Respondent.#

220056018_Final Order_07262006.pdf, page 3ASSESSMENT OF PENALTY Under 49 U.S.C. 5 60122, Respondent is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000 per violation for each day of the violation up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any related series of violations. The Notice proposed a $5,000 civil penalty for violation of 49 C.F.R. 5 195.420(b). 49 U.S.C. 5 60122 and 49 C.F.R. 5 190.225 require that, in determining the amount of the civil penalty, I consider the following criteria: nature, circumstances, and gravity of the violation, degree of Respondent's culpability, history of Respondent's prior offenses, Respondent's ability to pay the penalty, good faith by Respondent in attempting to achieve compliance, the effect on Respondent's ability to continue in business, and such other matters as justice may require. Item 2 of the Notice proposed a civil penalty of $5,000, as Respondent failed to inspect its five (5) mainline valves to determine that they are functioning properly at intervals not exceeding 7% months, but at least twice each calendar year. Respondent only inspected its five (5) main line valves during calendar years 2003 and 2004. Respondent did not contest the allegation of violation. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment criteria, I assess Respondent a civil penalty of $5,000, already paid by Respondent. WARNING ITEMS The Notice did not propose a civil penalty or compliance action for Items 1,3, and 4 in the Notice; therefore, these are considered warning items. Respondent is warned that if it does not take appropriate action to correct these items, enforcement action will be taken if a subsequent inspection reveals a violation. The terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt. JUL 2 6 2006 Date Issued#