Enforcement 
Civil Penalties
On December 21, 2006, the Commission issued a Statement of Administrative Policy Regarding the Process for Assessing Civil Penalties 
which provides a comprehensive review of the statutory requirements associated with the imposition of civil penalties under Parts I and II of the FPA, the NGA, and the NGPA. Each statute is somewhat different, and the Commission outlined the process it would follow in assessing civil penalties under each of the statutes. The Penalty Process Order not only sets forth the penalty assessment process, but also explains the rights of the party against whom the Commission may propose to assess a penalty, and explains the administrative and judicial procedures to be provided in each case.
In EPAct 2005 Congress granted the Commission enhanced authority to assess civil penalties for violations of the FPA, NGA, and NGPA. EPAct 2005 made three major changes to the Commission’s civil penalty authority.
- Congress expanded the Commission’s FPA civil penalty authority to cover violations of any provision of Part II of the FPA, as well as of any rule or order issued there under.
- Congress extended the Commission’s civil penalty authority to cover violations of the NGA or any rule, regulation, restriction, condition, or order made or imposed by the Commission under NGA authority.
- Congress established the maximum civil penalty the Commission may assess under the NGA, NGPA, or Part II of the FPA as $1,000,000 per violation for each day that it continues.
In addition, Congress expanded the scope of the criminal provisions of the FPA, NGA, and NGPA by increasing the maximum fines and increasing the maximum imprisonment time that apply when the Commission refers the case to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
The Commission, when possible, will negotiate civil penalties as part of a Stipulation and Consent Agreement resolving compliance issues. In such cases the civil penalty is imposed through a Commission order approving the negotiated agreement, obviating the need for an assessment process.
The Commission will consider mitigating factors when determining what remedies are appropriate for a particular violation. While the goal is “vigorous and even-handed enforcement,” the Commission has made it clear that it will credit an entity for its internal compliance plans and self-reporting of violations when determining what, if any, remedy would be appropriate for the violation.
