C.F.R. » Title 49 » CHAPTER I—PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION › SUBCHAPTER D—PIPELINE SAFETY › PART 196—PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND PIPELINES FROM EXCAVATION ACTIVITY › Subpart C—Administrative Enforcement Process

49 C.F.R. § 196.205

Can PHMSA assess administrative civil penalties for violations?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Yes. When the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety has reason to believe that a person has violated any provision of the 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq. or any regulation or order issued thereunder, including a violation of excavation damage prevention requirements under this part and 49 U.S.C. 60114(d) in a State with an excavation damage prevention law enforcement program PHMSA has deemed inadequate under 49 CFR part 198, subpart D, PHMSA may conduct a proceeding to determine the nature and extent of the violation and to assess a civil penalty.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2021–2021 · leading case: Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. 8.60 Acres of Land, Owned By Dowdy Farm LLC (W.D. Va. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. 8.60 Acres of Land, Owned By Dowdy Farm LLC (W.D. Va. 2021). “49 C.F.R. § 196.205 . II. DISCUSSION A. Standard of Review Under Rule 72(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a district judge is required to “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.