{"operation":"document","citation":"CPF 420105006","title":"SHELL PIPELINE CO., L.P. — Notice of Probable Violation","source_type":"enforcement","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2010-02-11","effective_on":null,"summary":"CLOSED notice of probable violation citing 195.52(a), 195.54(b).","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420105006.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420105006.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-420105006","source_url":"https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/420105006","body":"Notice of Probable Violation involving SHELL PIPELINE CO., L.P.. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulations as 195.52(a),  195.54(b). The case was opened on 2010-02-11 and is reported as closed as of 2011-06-02. Proposed civil penalty: $18,800. Assessed civil penalty: $6,300. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.\n\nOfficial case documents:\n\n420105006_FinalOrder_05022011.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420105006/420105006_FinalOrder_05022011.pdf\n\n420105006_FinalOrder_05022011_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420105006/420105006_FinalOrder_05022011_text.pdf\n\n420105006_NOPV PCP PCO_02112010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420105006/420105006_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_02112010.pdf\n\n420105006_NOPV PCP PCO_02112010_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420105006/420105006_NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_02112010_text.pdf\n\n420105006_Response to NOPV PCP PCO_03112010.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/420105006/420105006_Response%20to%20NOPV%20PCP%20PCO_03112010.pdf\n\n420105006_NOPV PCP PCO_02112010_text.pdf\n\nNOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION\nPROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY\nand\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\nFebruary 11, 2010\nMs. Mary Mujica\nPresident\nShell Pipeline Co., L.P.\n777 Walker, Suite 1500, (Two Shell Plaza)\nHouston, TX 77252\nCPF 4-2010-5006\nMs. Mujica:\nOn August 6 and September 2, 2009, representatives of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code investigated\nan accident that occurred on July 25, 2009 on Shell Pipeline Co., L.P.’s (Shell) 20-inch crude oil\ntransmission pipeline (MMS segment #4006) in the Eugene Island pipeline system in the Gulf of\nMexico in Ship Shoal Area Block 142.\nAs a result of the accident investigation, it appears that you have committed probable violations\nof the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected\nand the probable violation(s) are:\n1. §195.52 Telephonic notice of certain accidents\n(a) At the earliest practicable moment following discovery of a release of the\nhazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in an event described in\n§195.50, the operator of the system shall give notice, in accordance with paragraph\n(b) of this section, of any failure that:\n\n\n\n(1) Caused a death or a personal injury requiring hospitalization;\n(2) Resulted in either a fire or explosion not intentionally set by the operator;\n(3) Caused estimated property damage, including cost of cleanup and recovery,\nvalue of lost product, and damage to the property of the operator or others, or\nboth, exceeding $50,000;\n(4) Resulted in pollution of any stream, river, lake, reservoir, or other similar\nbody of water that violated applicable water quality standards, caused a\ndiscoloration of the surface of the water or adjoining shoreline, or deposited a\nsludge or emulsion beneath the surface of the water or upon adjoining\nshorelines; or\n(5) In the judgment of the operator was significant even though it did not meet\nthe criteria of any other paragraph of this section.\n(b) Reports made under paragraph (a) of this section are made by telephone to 800-\n424-8802 (in Washington, DC 20590-0001 (202) 372-2428) and must include the\nfollowing information:\n(1) Name and address of the operator.\n(2) Name and telephone number of the reporter.\n(3) The location of the failure.\n(4) The time of the failure.\n(5) The fatalities and personal injuries, if any.\n(6) All other significant facts known by the operator that are relevant to the\ncause of the failure or extent of the damages.\nShell failed to provide a telephonic notice to the National Response Center (NRC) (NRC #\n912739) that included the most accurate release volume estimate available at the time of the\nnotification. On July 25, 2009 at 8:09 PM CDT, Shell telephonically notified the NRC of the\nrelease of crude oil from their Eugene Island pipeline system following confirmation of the\nrelease by a flyover of the release site. NRC # 912739 details that the quantity released was\nreported as “0 unknown amount”. This flyover on July 25, 2009 provided information on the\ncoloration and size of the oil sheen on the water from which an estimate of the amount of product\nreleased could have been calculated from available industry applications, and an accurate\nestimate should have been reported.\nShell failed to provide prompt follow-up reports during the emergency phase of the response\nwhen a revised estimate of the product release amount identified that the release was\nsignificantly greater than the original amount reported. A subsequent fly-over of the release site\non July 26, 2009 provided additional information from which Shell could have estimated the\nvolume released and provided updated information to the NRC. Also, information readily\navailable to Shell from pipeline specifications and SCADA data provide for making estimates of\nrelease volumes using available industry applications. On July 29, 2009, Shell provided\ntelephonic notification to the NRC for report # 913179 (update to NRC # 912739) with the\nestimated quantity released being 1500 bbls.\n2\n\n\n\n2. §195.54 Accident reports.\n(a) Each operator that experiences an accident that is required to be reported under\n§195.50 shall as soon as practicable, but not later than 30 days after discovery of the\naccident, prepare and file an accident report on DOT Form 7000-1, or a facsimile.\n(b) Whenever an operator receives any changes in the information reported or\nadditions to the original report on DOT Form 7000-1, it shall file a supplemental\nreport within 30 days.\nShell failed to file a supplemental report for the Eugene Island pipeline system accident that\noccurred on July 25, 2009 within 30 days after the metallurgical failure report was obtained that\nprovided information on the probable cause of failure. On July 25, 2009, at approximately 5:54\np.m. CST, a 20-inch crude oil transmission pipeline (MMS segment #4006) in the Eugene Island\npipeline system, owned and operated by Shell Pipeline Company LP (Shell), ruptured in the Gulf\nof Mexico in Ship Shoal Area Block (SS) 142. A metallurgical failure analysis was performed\nby Stork Testing & Metallurgical Consulting, Inc. (Stork), in Houston, TX. The probable cause\nof the rupture was determined to be abrasion and gouging of the pipe, followed by fatigue\ncracking. The Stork Metallurgical Failure Report # 0608-09-19272 was provided by Stork to the\noperator on or about October 27, 2009. As of February 4, 2010, a supplemental PHMSA 7000-1\nreport has not been filed, updating the original report with the final metallurgical failure report\ninformation as to the cause of the accident.\nProposed Civil Penalty\nUnder 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000\nfor each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. The Compliance Officer has reviewed the circumstances and\nsupporting documentation involved in the above probable violation(s) and has recommended that\nyou be preliminarily assessed a civil penalty of $18,800 as follows:\nItem number PENALTY\n2 $ 18,800\nWarning Items\nWith respect to item 1 we have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved\nin this case and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment\nproceedings at this time. We advise you to promptly correct these item(s). Be advised that\nfailure to do so may result in Shell being subject to additional enforcement action.\n3\n\n\n\nProposed Compliance Order\nWith respect to item number 2 pursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration proposes to issue a Compliance Order to Shell\nPipeline Co., L.P. Please refer to the Proposed Compliance Order, which is enclosed and made\na part of this Notice.\nResponse to this Notice\nEnclosed as part of this Notice is a document entitled Response Options for Pipeline Operators\nin Compliance Proceedings. Please refer to this document and note the response options. Be\nadvised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being\nmade publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for\nconfidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you\nmust provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for\nconfidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information\nqualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). If you do not respond within 30 days\nof receipt of this Notice, this constitutes a waiver of your right to contest the allegations in this\nNotice and authorizes the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety to find facts as alleged in\nthis Notice without further notice to you and to issue a Final Order.\nIn your correspondence on this matter, please refer to CPF 4-2010-5006 and for each document\nyou submit, please provide a copy in electronic format whenever possible.\nSincerely,\nR. M. Seeley\nDirector, Southwest Region\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\nEnclosures: Proposed Compliance Order\nResponse Options for Pipeline Operators in Compliance Proceedings\n4\n\n\n\nPROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER\nPursuant to 49 United States Code § 60118, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) proposes to issue to Shell Pipeline Co., L.P. a Compliance Order\nincorporating the following remedial requirements to ensure the compliance of Shell Pipeline\nCo., L.P. with the pipeline safety regulations:\n1. In regard to Item Number 2 of the Notice pertaining to failure to comply with the\nrequirements of §195.54, Shell must immediately file a supplemental DOT Form\n7000-1 report for number 20090235 specifying the cause of failure of the Eugene\nIsland pipeline accident and updating any other information obtained since the\naccident. If all of the information about the accident is known, this information\nmust be included and the accident report filed as a final report.\n2. Shell shall maintain documentation of the safety improvement costs associated\nwith fulfilling this Compliance Order and submit the total to R.M. Seeley,\nDirector, Southwest Region, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration. Costs shall be reported in two categories: 1) total cost associated\nwith preparation/revision of plans, procedures, studies and analyses, and 2) total\ncost associated with replacements, additions and other changes to pipeline\ninfrastructure.\n5\n\n420105006_FinalOrder_05022011_text.pdf\n\nMAY 02 2011\nMr. Greg Smith\nPresident\nShell Pipeline Company, LP\nOne Shell Square\n701 Poydras\nSuite 1000\nNew Orleans, LA 70139\nRe: CPF No. 4-2010-5006\nDear Mr. Smith:\nEnclosed please find the Final Order issued in the above-referenced case. It makes a finding of\nviolation and assesses a reduced civil penalty of $6,300. It further finds that Shell Pipeline\nCompany, LP, has completed the actions specified in the Notice to comply with the pipeline\nsafety regulations. When the civil penalty has been paid, this enforcement action will be closed.\nService of the Final Order by certified mail is deemed effective upon the date of mailing, or as\notherwise 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. Rod M. Seeley, Director, Southwest Region, PHMSA\nMr. Brian Sitterly\nShell Pipeline Company, LP\nTwo Shell Plaza 1536\n777 Walker Street\nHouston, TX 77002\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [7005 1160 0001 0075 9152]\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 )\nShell Pipeline Company, LP, ) CPF No. 4-2010-5006\n)\n)\n)\nRespondent. )\n____________________________________)\nFINAL ORDER\nBetween August 6, 2009, and September 2, 2009, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60117, a\nrepresentative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Office\nof Pipeline Safety (OPS), investigated an accident that occurred on July 25, 2009, on Shell\nPipeline Company, LP’s 20-inch crude oil transmission pipeline in the Eugene Island pipeline\nsystem. Shell Pipeline Company, LP (Shell Pipeline or Respondent), is a wholly-owned\nsubsidiary of Shell Oil Products US, a unit of Shell Oil Company, and transports over two billion\nbarrels of crude oil and refined products annually, with pipelines in several states.1\nThe accident occurred on July 25, 2009, at approximately 5:54 p.m. C.S.T., on the Eugene Island\npipeline system and resulted in the release of 1,500 barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico.2\nThe Eugene Island pipeline system moves crude oil from offshore platforms through a 20-inch\npipeline to Caillou Island, Louisiana, and through a 16-inch line to the Houma Tank Farm.3\nAs a result of the inspection, the Director, Southwest Region, OPS (Director), issued to\nRespondent, by letter dated February 11, 2010, a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil\nPenalty and Warning (Notice). In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 190.207, the Notice proposed\nfinding that Shell Pipeline had violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54 and proposed assessing a civil\npenalty of $18,800 for the alleged violation. The Notice also proposed finding that Respondent\nhad committed a probable violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.52 and warning Respondent to take\nappropriate corrective action or be subject to future enforcement action.\nShell Pipeline responded to the Notice by letter dated March 11, 2010 (Response). The company\ncontested the warning item (§ 195.52) but did not contest the alleged violation of § 195.54.\nRespondent asserted that the proposed penalty for Item 2 was excessive, but indicated that it\n1 http://www.shellpipeline.com/home.asp (last visited March 15, 2011).\n2 Pipeline Safety Violation Report (Violation Report) (August 6, 2009 – September 2, 2009), at 1.\n3 http://www.shellpipeline.com/custinfo_crude_maps.asp (last visited March 16, 2011).\n\n\n\n2\nwould pay the civil penalty in order to resolve the item.4 Respondent did not request a hearing\nand therefore has waived its right to one.\nFINDING OF VIOLATION\nIn its Response, Shell Pipeline did not contest the allegation in the Notice that it violated 49\nC.F.R. § 195.54, as follows:\nItem 2: The Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54, which states:\n§ 195.54 -- Accident reports.\n(a) Each operator that experiences an accident that is required to be\nreported under § 195.50 shall as soon as practicable, but not later than 30\ndays after discovery of the accident, prepare and file an accident report on\nDOT Form 7000-1, or a facsimile.\n(b) Whenever an operator receives any changes in the information\nreported or additions to the original report on DOT Form 7000-1, it shall\nfile a supplemental report within 30 days.\nThe Notice alleged that Respondent violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54(b) by failing to file a\nsupplemental report within 30 days after it received changes in the information initially reported\non DOT/PHMSA Form 7000-1. Shell Pipeline submitted the original and supplemental\nDOT/PHMSA 7000-1 reports on August 17, 2009, and September 28, 2009, respectively, listing\nthe cause of the accident as unknown and designating the “root cause analysis and metallurgical\ninvestigation [as] ongoing.”5 On October 27, 2009, Shell Pipeline received a final metallurgical\nfailure analysis report (Metallurgical Report) from Stork Testing & Metallurgical Consulting,\nInc. (Stork Testing).6 In this report, Stork Testing stated that the rupture in the 20-inch pipeline\naccordance with Section 195.54(b), Shell Pipeline should have submitted a supplemental\nwas caused by “severe abrasion and gouging of the pipe, followed by fatigue cracking.”7 In\nDOT/PHMSA 7000-1 report within 30 days of its receipt of this Metallurgical Report. However,\nShell Pipeline did not file the final supplemental DOT Form 7000-1 until after the Notice was\nissued.\nIn its Response, Shell Pipeline did not contest this allegation of violation. Instead, Shell Pipeline\nnoted that company representatives met with PHMSA on November 13, 2009, sixteen days after\nits receipt of the Metallurgical Report, and delivered a copy of the supplemental DOT Form\n7000-1 to OPS at that time. Shell Pipeline acknowledged that this action did not relieve the\ncompany of the requirements of § 195.54(b) and agreed to pay the proposed civil penalty.\n4 Response, at 3.\n5 Pipeline Safety Violation Report (Violation Report) (August 6, 2009 – September 2, 2009), Exhibit B, Original\naccident report, DOT Form 7000-1, dated August 17, 2009 (Report ID 20090235) and Supplemental accident report,\nDOT Form 7000-1, dated September 28, 2009 (Report ID 20090235).\n6 Violation Report, Exhibit B, Stork Metallurgical Failure Report #0608-09-19272 (Metallurgical Report).\n7 Id., at 2.\n\n\n\n3\nUnder 49 U.S.C. § 60122, Respondent is subject to an administrative civil penalty not to exceed\n$100,000 per violation for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of $1,000,000 for any\nrelated series of violations. 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; the Respondent’s\nability to pay the penalty and any effect that the penalty may have on its ability to continue doing\nbusiness; and the good faith of Respondent in attempting to comply with the pipeline safety\nregulations. In addition, I may consider the economic benefit gained from the violation without\nany reduction because of subsequent damages, and such other matters as justice may require.\nThe Notice proposed a total civil penalty of $18,800 for the violations cited above.\nItem 2: The Notice proposed a civil penalty of $18,800 for Respondent’s violation of 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.54(b), for failing to file a supplemental report within 30 days after it received changes in\nthe information initially reported. In its Response, Shell Pipeline argued that the proposed\npenalty was excessive and noted that it had provided the supplemental report to PHMSA at an in-\nperson meeting prior to the expiration of the 30-day deadline. Regardless, Shell Pipeline\nevidence and considered the assessment criteria including § 190.225(a)(5) and find that the\noperator acted in good faith by delivering a copy of the supplemental report to region personnel\nbefore the deadline. Accordingly, having reviewed the record and considered the assessment\nindicated that it would pay the civil penalty in order to resolve the item.9 I have reviewed the\ncriteria, I find that a reduced civil penalty is appropriate and assess Respondent a civil penalty of\n$6,300 for violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.54(b).\nPayment of the civil penalty must be made within 20 days of service. Federal regulations\n(49 C.F.R. § 89.21(b)(3)) require such payment to be made by wire transfer through the Federal\nReserve Communications System (Fedwire), to the account of the U.S. Treasury. Detailed\ninstructions are contained in the enclosure. Questions concerning wire transfers should be\ndirected to: Financial Operations Division (AMZ-341), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike\nMonroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 269039, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125. The\nFinancial Operations Division telephone number is (405) 954-8893.\nI have reviewed all of the evidence and note that the supplemental report was formally filed with\nPHMSA outside of the 30-day requirement. PHMSA has a defined process for collecting and\nanalyzing this information. Pursuant to the instructions for DOT Form 7000-1, operators are\nrequired to submit accident reports to the Information Resources Manager at PHMSA’s\ncopies of this form at a meeting with Southwest Region representatives in November 2009,\nRespondent should have also filed it with the Information Resources Manager. Accordingly, I\nheadquarters building in Washington, D.C.8 Although Shell Pipeline may have distributed\nfind that Shell Pipeline violated 49 C.F.R. § 195.54(b) by failing to file a supplemental report\nwithin 30 days after it received changes in the information initially reported.\nASSESSMENT OF PENALTY\n8 The new instructions applicable to all accidents occurring after January 1, 2010 permit operators to file accident\nreports online, by mail, or by facsimile.\n9 Response, at 3.\n\n\n\n4\nCOMPLIANCE ORDER\nThe Notice proposed a compliance order with respect to Item 2 in the Notice for violation of 49\nC.F.R. § 195.54(b). Under 49 U.S.C. § 60118(a), each person who engages in the transportation\nof hazardous liquids or who owns or operates a pipeline facility is required to comply with the\napplicable safety standards established under chapter 601. The Director indicates that\nRespondent has taken the following actions specified in the proposed compliance order:\n1. With respect to the violation of § 195.54(b) (Item 2), Respondent filed a final\nsupplemental DOT/PHMSA Form 7000-1 report on February 18, 2010, which\nincluded the information from the Metallurgical Report related to the cause of the\nJuly 25, 2009 accident.\nAccordingly, I find that compliance has been achieved with respect to this violation. Therefore,\nthe compliance terms proposed in the Notice are not included in this Order.\nWARNING ITEM\nWith respect to Item 1, the Notice alleged a probable violation of Part 195 but did not propose a\ncivil penalty or compliance order for this item. Therefore, this item is considered to be a\nwarning item. The warning was for:\n49 C.F.R. § 195.52 (Item 1) ─ Respondent’s alleged failure to provide a\ntelephonic notice to the National Response Center (NRC) that included the most\naccurate release volume estimate available at the time of the notification.\nOn July 25, 2009, at 8:09 p.m. C.S.T., Shell Pipeline conducted a fly-over of the accident\nsite and telephonically notified the NRC of a release of crude oil.10\nIn incident report #\n912739, Shell Pipeline indicated the quantity released was “0 unknown amount.”\nHowever, in the Notice, PHMSA alleged that during this July 25, 2009 fly-over,\nRespondent should have calculated the estimated quantity release using industry\napplications from the information gathered from the fly-over. Namely, Respondent\nshould have considered the coloration and size of the oil sheen on the water and used\nSCADA data to estimate the volume of the spill.\nPHMSA further alleged that Respondent failed to provide prompt follow-up reports\nduring the emergency phase of the response, when a revised estimate indicated that the\nrelease quantity was significantly greater than the amount originally reported.\nIn its Response, Shell Pipeline argued that it reported the release volume as “unknown”\nduring the initial call to NRC because the July 25, 2009 fly-over was conducted at dusk\nand visibility was poor. Respondent also stated that the NRC erred in reporting the\nrelease volume as unknown, when it should have entered a default spill estimate of “1000\nbarrels.”11\nFinally, Shell Pipeline argued that it had used SCADA data later in the\n10 Violation Report, Exhibit A, Telephonic notice to the NRC on July 25, 2009 (Incident Report #912739).\n11 “Pipeline Safety: Required Notification of National Response Center”, 67 Fed. Reg. 57060-01 (September 6,\n2002).\n\n\n\n5\nevening on July 25, 2009, that it conducted a fly-over on the morning of July 26, 2009,\nand calculated a visual estimate. On July 29, 2009, PHMSA staff informed Shell\nPipeline that the initial NRC report contained ‘0’ as the estimated spill volume. Shell\nPipeline then provided an update to the NRC (report # 913179) indicating that the\nquantity released was 1,500 barrels.12\nShell Pipeline also explained in its Response that it\ncommunicated these estimates directly to Coast Guard personnel on July 26, 2009, and\nlater to PHMSA and MMS (now Bureau of Ocean of Energy Management, Regulation\nand Enforcement).\nSince Item 1 is a warning item, no finding of violation is made as to the validity of these\narguments or whether the evidence of the alleged conduct supports a warning of probable\nviolation. Accordingly, having considered such information, I have determined, pursuant to 49\nC.F.R. § 190.205, that a probable violation of 49 C.F.R. § 195.52 (Notice Item 1) has occurred.\nIn the event that OPS finds a violation of this provision in a subsequent inspection, Respondent\nmay be subject to future enforcement action.\nUnder 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, Respondent has the right to submit a Petition for Reconsideration of\nthis Final Order. The petition must be sent to: Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline\nSafety, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC\n20590, with a copy sent to the Office of Chief Counsel, PHMSA, at the same address. PHMSA\nwill accept petitions received no later than 20 days after receipt of service of the Final Order by\nthe Respondent, provided they contain a brief statement of the issue(s) and meet all other\nrequirements of 49 C.F.R. § 190.215. The filing of a petition automatically stays the payment of\nany civil penalty assessed but does not stay any other provisions of the Final Order, including\nany required corrective actions. If Respondent submits payment of the civil penalty, the Final\nOrder becomes the final administrative decision and the right to petition for reconsideration is\nwaived.\nThe terms and conditions of this Final Order are effective upon service in accordance with 49\nC.F.R. § 190.5.\n___________________________________ __________________________\nJeffrey D. Wiese Date Issued\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Pipeline Safety\n12 Violation Report, Exhibit A, Telephonic notice to the NRC on July 25, 2009 (Incident Report #913179).","truncated":false,"body_characters":26138}