NTSB Safety Recommendation Letter P-82-022 through P-82-023

Page 1Official PDFNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. James Nugent Chairman Railroad Commission of Texas Drawer 12967 Austin, Texas 78711 J } SAFETY RECOMMENDAT I O N (SI P-82-22 and -23 i - A t 1:38 p.m., c,d.t., on September 27, 1981, near Ackerly, Texas, the Chaparral Pipeline, a refined petroleum products 12-inch steel pipeline owned by the Santa Fe Pipeline Company, was damaged by a rathole drill bit; the wall of the pipe was weakened, and i t ruptured under the 1,100 psig operating pressure. The ethane-propane mixture in the pipeline began to escape and was ignited by the drilling rig engine. The ensuing explosion and fire killed three persons; critically burned one person, who died 4 days later; destroyed the rathole drilling rig, a pickup truck, a road grader, a compactor, and 60 acres of cotton; and burned 12,749 barrels (535,458 gallons) of ethanepropane mixture. i/ After acquiring the lease, the Jet Oil Company sought a title opinion to assure that a clear title existed on 480 acres of land which comprised the west half and the southeast quarter of Section 37, Township 3 North, Block 35, Texas & Pacific Railroad Survey. The title search disclosed that a right-of-way (ROW) had been granted to the Reef Corporation covering the entire section. This row was utilized to construct a gathering line in the northeast quarter of Section 37. However, the presence of the 12-inch Chaparral pipeline, located in the southeast corner of the section, was not uncovered in the title search. On August 24, 1981, a surveyor staked a location for a well, Jet Oil Company Hale "Bn No. 1, to be drilled for Jet at a spot located 660 feet north and 660 feet west of the southeast corner of Section 37. Knee-high cotton covered most of Section 37 and the adjacent sections. The property owner and a friend were at the site at the time, but neither person mentioned the presence of a pipeline, and no request was made for such knowledge. The surveyor saw no evidence of a pipeline. On August 26, the plat prepared by the surveyor and an application for a permit to drill the well were submitted to the Oil and Gas Division of the Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC). Aerial surveillance of the Chaparral pipeline was conducted on September 15 and 16 by Griffin Pipeline Patrol Company. At that time, there was no evidence of impending activity on the property. - 1/ For mwe detailed information, read Pipeline Accident Report-?'The Chaparral Pipeline, Explosion and Fire, Ackerly, Texas, September 27, 1981" (NTSB-PAR-82-2). 3498#

Page 2-2- The drilling permit was issued on September 17, 1981. However, J e t decided move the stake for the well closer to a newly completed producing well. Although t change in location was within the tolerance provided by TRRC Spacing Rule 37, required to submit a revised plat with an application for an amended drilling permit. permit for the new location was issued on September 21, 1981. Britt Trucking and Construction Company (Britt) moved onto locati September 21 and began preparation of the wellsite and the caliche access road. Britt supervisors, looked for evidence of a pipeline in the immediate vicinity b none. Both were experienced in preparing wellsite locations and were former pipe1 Britt's initial activity of clearing the location and leveling the drill site revealed no of a backfilled pipeline trench. On Sunday morning, September 27, while Britt employees were completing work on the wellsite and access road, a truck-mounted rathole drilling rig was moved in on location by C.B. Harris Rathole Service (Harris) to drill the shallow surface hole, the mousehole, and the rathole for Jet's rotary drilling contractor. Harris' two-ma completed drilling a surface hole and a mousehole, and then began drilling a 12 1/4-inch diameter rathole. A t 1:38 p.m., c.d.t., the rathole drill-bit encountered a 12-inch steel pipeline which was a t a depth of 43 inches and was operating a t a pressure of 1,100 psig. The pipeline ruptured and escaping ethane-propane mixture was ignited by t h e rathole drilling rig's engine. This is not an isolated incident; there have been other similar pipeline ac involving drilling activities: On September 4, 1981, a drilling rig, operated by a crew core-drilling for coal near Belle, West Virginia, punctured a 12-inch gas transmission line. The transmission line was operated by Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, and at the time of the accident, was operating a t a pressure of 600 psig. The rig operator was injured, the rig and a truck were destroyed, and an estimated volume of 3,433,000 cubic feet of gas was lost. On October 2, 1981, a rathole rig drilling near Andrews, Texas, ruptur a crude oil gathering line. Sour crude oil escaped from the line. No one was injured. On May 27, 1980, near Cartwright, Louisiana, an anhydrous ammoni pipeline operated by Santa Fe's Gulf Central Pipeline Company, struck by a bulldozer which was being used to prepare a wellsite, and pipeline ruptured. Over 100 people were evacuated from the area. 21 Over 500 rotary drilling rigs are currently operating in t h e Permian Basin Texas and New Mexico, where 12 percent of the drilling activity in the Unit takes place. A majority of the drilling is for development wells that are located densely underlain by pipelines, many of which are unmarked. The surveyor, wh the jet well location, stated that he had staked and moved another location for time because of pipeline conflicts. The pipeline surveillance reporrs for t h e right-of-way were also indicative of the extent of drilling activity. The pr patrol report noted, 'IMP 171 Drilling rig with slush pits 50 yards south of R postaccident patrol report stated: 'IMP 4 1 / 2 Drill pads on north edge of ROW ' - 2/ "Pipeline Accident Report--Summary Format, Issue Number 1--1982" 82-1).#

Page 3-3- The Texas Railroad Commission's Oil and Gas Division requires that an application for a permit to drill a well shall be made under the provisions of its Rule 37, or an ex- ception thereto, and that the permit application be accompanied by a plat, or a sketch, drawn to scale showing the property, the well location, and t h e location of any existing wells. There are no requirements that the survey plat show t h e location of any hazard within a prescribed distance of t h e drilling. However, the survey plat is prepared by the surveyor, who is usually a person well qualified to determine the location of pipelines and who stakes t h e well location before any excavation or drilling activity on the property. The Safety Board is concerned about damage to pipelines caused by drilling activities and the use of outside excavation equipment since the location of a pipeline can be ascertained in several ways: on a title as a rights-of-way encumbrance; on various maps used by the petroleum industry; from t h e property owner or others; as a trace on the ground; by use of a pipe locator or metal detector; by the pipeline company in response to notification through use of a "one-call" system where one exists; or by markings at its intersections with roads, in accordance with the requirements of 49 CFR 195.410. The effectiveness of the "one-call" notification system has been proven; however, although no statewide, "one-call" system exists in Texas, current efforts by t h e pipeline industry to formulate and implement a "one-call" system in t h e State of Texas merit the support of the entire petroleum industry. A s a result of its investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the Railroad Commission of Texas: Revise its Oil and Gas Division's Rule 37, t o require that survey plats also include t h e location of any hazards within a prescribed distance of a drilling location. (Class 11, Priority Action) (P-82-22) Support t h e pipeline industry's efforts to formulate and implement a "one-calltl notification system in the State of Texas. (Class 11, Priority Action) (P-82-23) BURNETT, Chairman, GOLDMAN, Vice Chairman, and McADAMS and BURSLEY, Members, concurred in these recommendations. Jim Burnett Chairman#