{"operation":"document","citation":"PHMSA FIR, Mid-Valley Pipeline Co, 2009-02-18","title":"Failure Report- Mid-Valley Pipeline Co 2/18/09","source_type":"incident","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"historical","official":true,"published_on":"2010-11-17","effective_on":"2009-02-18","summary":"Mid-Valley Pipeline Co; Hazardous Liquid; OH; failure 2009-02-18; apparent cause: Material Failure.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-fir-failure-report-mid-valley-pipeline-co-21809.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-fir-failure-report-mid-valley-pipeline-co-21809.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-fir-failure-report-mid-valley-pipeline-co-21809","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/safety-reports/failure-report-mid-valley-pipeline-co-21809","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nPipeline System: 22-inch Maumee Pipeline Operator: Mid-Valley Pipeline Company\nLocation: Cygnet, Ohio Medium Released: Crude Oil Date of Occurrence: 2-18-2009\nQuantity: 1250 bbls\nPHMSA Arrival Time & Date: 2-19-2009; 10:00 a.m. Total Damages $ 4,614,052\nInvestigation Responsibility: State PHMSA NTSB Other\nCompany Reported Apparent Cause: Corrosion Excavation\nNatural Forces Incorrect Operation Other Outside Force Damage\nMaterial and/or Welds Equipment and Operations Other\nRupture Yes No\nLeak Yes No\nFire Yes No\nExplosion Yes No\nEvacuation Yes No Number of Persons 1 Area n/a\nNarrative Summary\nShort summary of the Incident/Accident which will give interested person’s sufficient information to make them aware of the basic scenario and\nfacts.\nOn February 18, 2009, Mid Valley Pipeline’s 22” Maumee Pipeline (Lima to Cygnet) experienced a leak at a 12” diameter branch\nconnection. The damaged pipeline, which was operating at the time, released 1250 barrels of crude oil into a farm field.\nEventually, 782 of the 1250 barrels released were recovered. Some of the crude oil, approximately 200 barrels, did contaminate a\nlocal creek. There were no fatalities, or injuries. One person was evacuated for several hours. The release did occur in a high\nconsequence area (drinking water).\nA PHMSA engineer conducted an on-site investigation of the failure. The investigative summary is as follows:\nThe failure occurred at approximately 3:00 p.m. EST on February 18, 2009. The failure is located near milepost marker 46, in a\nrural area of Wood County, south of Cygnet, OH. The failure was detected at 4:55 p.m. the same day when a Mid Valley Pipeline\n(MVP) employee driving near the Cygnet pump station discovered a pool of crude oil on the ground surface. The employee\nnotified the MVP control center, which immediately shut down the Maumee Pipeline. MVP blocked in the line segment at 5:00\np.m. by remotely isolating the upstream (Lima) and downstream (Cygnet) pump stations. The pipeline was repaired and placed\nback in service on February 18, 2009.\nIn July 2003, MVP de-commissioned the 12” branch line. At the time of failure, the branch connection contained the attachment\nweld, approximately 50-inches of 12” diameter pipe, a 12” diameter valve (flanged) and a blind flange. Beyond the blind flange,\nthe 12” branch connection piping was removed. The pipeline experienced a crack in the 12” branch connection attachment weld.\nThe crack developed at the top (12 O’clock) position of the attachment weld, oriented circumferentially with the branch\nconnection and longitudinally with the Maumee Pipeline. The crack measured 11” long and 0.125” at the maximum width. The\ndriving stress for the crack was produced by the combined loading of the 22” x 12” diameter branch connection, the valve,\nflanging and somastic “mass” on the attachment weld.\nThe portion of the pipeline containing the failure is comprised of 22” diameter by 0.344” wall thickness API 5L - Grade B,\nseamless pipe, installed in 1949. The 12” diameter nominal branch line was attached at the 9 O’clock position to the mainline\nwith a self reinforcing weld-on outlet fitting. The reported maximum operating pressure (MOP) is 788 psig. The operating\npressure at the time and location of the failure was 470 psig. The MOP was established in accordance with 195.303, Risk Based\nAlternative to Pressure Testing. The pipeline external corrosion protection system consists of a Somastic coating and distributed\ngalvanic anodes.\n- 1 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nMVP identified two additional de-commissioned branch connections in the Maumee Pipeline System as a result of this failure.\nThese branch connections were cut out and removed from the Maumee Pipeline System.\nThe Maumee Pipeline System is a 994 mile long crude oil pipeline running from Longview, TX to Samaria, Michigan.\nOperator ID: 12470\nUnit ID: 3733\nSMART Activity ID: 124413\nRegion/State: Central Region Principal Investigator: Gery Bauman Reviewed by: __________________________\nTitle: Regional Director\nDate: November 5, 2010 Date:\n___________________________\n- 2 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nFailure Location & Response\nLocation (City, Township, Range, County/Parish): Cygnet, Ohio\n(Acquire Map)\nAddress or M.P. on Pipeline: MP 46 (1 ) (1)\nType of Area (Rural, City):\nRural. Near Mid Valley Pipeline Cygnet Pump Station\nDate: 2-18-2009 Time of Failure: Approximately 3:00 p.m.\nTime Detected: 4:55 p.m. Time Located: 4:55 p.m.\nHow Located: Mid Valley Pipeline employee driving home from work.\nNRC Report #: 897885 (Attach Report) Time Reported to NRC: 5:24 p.m.. Reported by:\nChester Wilson\nType of Pipeline:\nGas Distribution Gas Transmission Hazardous Liquid LNG\nLP Interstate Gas Interstate Liquid LNG Facility\nMunicipal Intrastate Gas Intrastate Liquid\nPublic Utility Jurisdictional Gas Gathering Offshore Liquid\nMaster Meter Offshore Gas Jurisdictional Liquid Gathering\nOffshore Gas - High H2S CO2\nPipeline Configuration (Regulator Station, Pump Station, Pipeline, etc.):\nThe leak originated from a crack, located in a fillet weld, between the 22” diameter main line and a 12” diameter branch\nconnection.\nOperator/Owner Information\nOwner: Mid Valley Pipeline Company Address: 1874 Horseshoe Pike\nHoney Brook Chester, PA\n19344-8500\nCompany Official: David Justin Phone No.: 610-670-3264 Fax No.: 610-670-3488 Operator: Mid Valley Pipeline Company\nAddress:\n1874 Horseshoe Pike\nHoney Brook Chester, PA\n19344-8500\nCompany Official: David Justin\nPhone No. 610-670-3264 Fax No. 610-670-3488\nDrug and Alcohol Testing Program Contacts N/A\nDrug Program Contact & Phone:\nAlcohol Program Contact & Phone:\nDamages\nProduct/Gas Loss or Spill(2 ) Estimated Property Damage $ 0\n1250 bbls\nAmount Recovered 782 bbls ) $\nAssociated Damages(3 4,598,052\nEstimated Amount $ 16,380\n1 Photo documentation\n2 Initial volume lost or spilled\n3 Including cleanup cost\n- 3 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nDamages\nDescription of Property Damage:\nEmergency response and environmental cleanup. Approximately 10,000 cubic yards of soil was contaminated. Also\napproximately 200 barrels of crude oil impacted a local creek.\nCustomers out of Service: Yes No Number:\nSuppliers out of Service: Yes No Number:\nFatalities and Injuries\nFatalities: Yes No Company: Contractor: Public:\nInjuries - Hospitalization: Yes No Company: Contractor: Public:\nInjuries - Non-Hospitalization: Yes No Company: Contractor: Public:\nTotal Injuries (including Non-Hospitalization): Company: Contractor: Public:\nName Job Function Yrs w/\nComp.\nYrs.\nExp.\nType of Injury\nDrug/Alcohol Testing N/A\nWere all employees that could have contributed to the incident, post-accident tested within the 2 hour time frame for alcohol or\nthe 32 hour time frame for all other drugs?\nYes No\nResults\nJob Function Test Date & Time Location\nType of Drug\nPos Neg\n- 4 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nSystem Description\nDescribe the Operator's System:\nMid-Valley Pipeline operates the Maumee Pipeline that transports crude oil from Lima, Ohio to refineries in Toledo, Ohio and\nan interconnect with a Marathon Pipeline at Samaria, Michigan.\nPipe Failure Description N/A\nLength of Failure (inches, feet, miles): 12\" (1)\nPosition (Top, Bottom, include position on pipe, 6 O'clock): (1) 12:00 O’clock position relative to the 12” diameter branch\nconnection.\nDescription of Failure (Corrosion Gouge, Seam Split): (1)\nCrack in fillet weld.\nLaboratory Analysis: Yes No\nPerformed by: Kiefner and Associates\nPreservation of Failed Section or Component: Yes No\nIf Yes - Method: Plastic wrap / tape and palletized for\nshipment.\nIn Custody of: Kiefner and Associates\nDevelop a sketch of the area including distances from roads, houses, stress inducing factors, pipe configurations, etc. Bar Hole\nTest Survey Plot should be outlined with concentrations at test points. Direction of Flow.\nComponent Failure Description N/A\nComponent Failed: (1)\nManufacturer: Model:\nPressure Rating: Size:\nOther (Breakout Tank, Underground Storage):\nPipe Data N/A\nMaterial: Grade B Wall Thickness/SDR: 0.344”\nDiameter (O.D.): 22\" Installation Date: 1949\nSMYS: 35,000 Manufacturer: Unknown\nLongitudinal Seam: Seamless Type of Coating: Somastic\nPipe Specifications (API 5L, ASTM A53, etc.): API 5L\nJoining N/A\nType: Fillet Weld Procedure: Pre-code construction 1949\nNDT Method: Unknown Inspected: Yes No\nPressure @ Time of Failure @ Failure Site N/A\n- 5 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nPressure @ Time of Failure @ Failure Site N/A\nPressure @ Failure Site: 470 psig Elevation @ Failure Site: 215 feet\nPressure Readings @ Various Locations: Direction from Failure Site\nLocation/M.P./Station # Pressure (psig) Elevation (ft msl) Upstream Downstream\nLima discharge 760 265 46.5 miles\nCygnet suction 457 215 0.5 mile\nUpstream Pump Station Data N/A\nType of Product: Crude Oil API Gravity: 37 API\nSpecific Gravity: 0.84 Flow Rate:\nPressure @ Time of Failure (4 ) 760\nDistance to Failure Site: 46.5 miles\nHigh Pressure Set Point: 788 Low Pressure Set Point:\nUpstream Compressor Station Data N/A\nSpecific Gravity: Flow Rate:\nPressure @ Time of Failure (4) Distance to Failure Site:\nHigh Pressure Set Point: Low Pressure Set Point:\nOperating Pressure N/A\nMax. Allowable Operating Pressure: 788 Determination of MAOP: 195.303 (Risk Based Alternative To\nPressure Testing)\nActual Operating Pressure: 470\nMethod of Over Pressure Protection: Pump station overpressure switch\nRelief Valve Set Point: Capacity Adequate? Yes No\nIntegrity Test After Failure N/A\nPressure Test Conducted in place? (Conducted on Failed Components or Associated Piping): Yes No\nIf NO, Tested after removal? Yes No\nMethod:\nDescribe any failures during the test.\nSoil/water Conditions @ Failure Site N/A\nCondition of and Type of Soil around Failure Site (Color, Wet, Dry, Frost Depth): Loam with field tile.\nType of Backfill (Size and Description): Loam backfill\n4 Obtain event logs and pressure recording charts\n- 6 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 7>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nSoil/water Conditions @ Failure Site N/A\nType of Water (Salt, Brackish): Fresh Water Analysis (5 ) Yes No\nExternal Pipe or Component Examination N/A\nExternal Corrosion? Yes No (1) Coating Condition (Disbonded, Non-existent):\nSomastic coating in good condition\n(1)\nDescription of Corrosion:\nNo external corrosion observed\nDescription of Failure Surface (Gouges, Arc Burns, Wrinkle Bends, Cracks, Stress Cracks, Chevrons, Fracture Mode, Point of\nOrigin):\nCrack across the upper portion of a 12” branch connection weld. Crack initiation at the weld toe and propagation appear to be\nassociated with brittle microstructures in the heat affected zone (HAZ) underlying the branch connection attachment weld. The\ncrack propagated in discrete, stable jumps and arrested in the body of the mainline pipe. Jogs or kinks in the crack path occurred\nnear weld spatter deposits on the OD surface of the mainline pipe.\nAbove Ground: Yes No (1) Buried: Yes No (1)\nStress Inducing Factors: Noted in Appendix 5. (1) Depth of Cover: 30\" (1)\nCathodic Protection N/A\nP/S (Surface): P/S (Interface):\nSoil Resistivity: pH: Date of Installation:\nMethod of Protection:\nDid the Operator have knowledge of Corrosion before the Incident? Yes No\nHow Discovered? (Close Interval Survey, Instrumented Pig, Annual Survey, Rectifier Readings, ECDA, etc):\nInternal Pipe or Component Examination N/A\nInternal Corrosion: Yes No (1) Injected Inhibitors: Yes No\nType of Inhibitors: Testing: Yes No\nResults (Coupon Test, Corrosion Resistance Probe): No testing\nDescription of Failure Surface (MIC, Pitting, Wall Thinning, Chevrons, Fracture Mode, Point of Origin):\nNo internal corrosion was evident on the inside of the removed section of mainline pipe, or branch piping.\nCleaning Pig Program: Yes No Gas and/or Liquid Analysis: Yes No\n5 Attach copy of water analysis report\n- 7 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 8>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nInternal Pipe or Component Examination N/A\nResults of Gas and/or Liquid Analysis (6\n) NA\nInternal Inspection Survey: Yes No\nResults (7\n)\nDid the Operator have knowledge of Corrosion before the Incident? Yes No\nHow Discovered? (Instrumented Pig, Coupon Testing, ICDA, etc.): NA\nOutside Force Damage N/A\nResponsible Party: Telephone No.:\nAddress:\nWork Being Performed:\nEquipment Involved: (1) Called One Call System? Yes No\nOne Call Name: One Call Report # (8\n)\nNotice Date:\nTime:\nResponse Date: Time:\nDetails of Response:\nWas Location Marked According to Procedures? Yes No\nPipeline Marking Type: (1) Location: (1)\nState Law Damage Prevention Program Followed? Yes No No State Law\nNotice Required: Yes No Response Required: Yes No\nWas Operator Member of State One Call? Yes No Was Operator on Site? Yes No\nDid a deficiency in the Public Awareness Program contribute to the accident? Yes No\nIs OSHA Notification Required? Yes No\n6 Attach copy of gas and/or liquid analysis report\n7 Attach copy of internal inspection survey report\n8 Attach copy of one-call report\n- 8 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 9>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nNatural Forces N/A\nDescription (Earthquake, Tornado, Flooding, Erosion):\nFailure Isolation N/A\nSqueeze Off/Stopple Location and Method:\nPipeline shut down.\n(1)\nValve Closed - Upstream: Lima Station Time: 5:00 p.m. I.D.:\nM.P.: 0\nValve Closed - Downstream: Cygnet Station Time: 5:00 p.m. I.D.:\nM.P.: 46.1\nPipeline Shutdown Method: Manual Automatic SCADA Controller ESD\nFailed Section Bypassed or Isolated: The cracked section of pipe was cut out.\nPerformed By: Valve Spacing:\nOdorization N/A\nGas Odorized: Yes No Concentration of Odorant (Post Incident at Failure Site):\nMethod of Determination: Yes No % LEL: Yes No % Gas In Air: Yes No\nTime Taken: Yes No\nWas Odorizer Working Prior to the Incident? Type of Odorizer (Wick, By-Pass):\nYes No\nOdorant Manufacturer: Model:\nType of Odorant:\nAmount Injected: Monitoring Interval (Weekly):\nOdorization History (Leaks Complaints, Low Odorant Levels, Monitoring Locations, Distances from Failure Site):\n- 9 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 10>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nOdorization N/A\nWeather Conditions N/A\nTemperature: Wind (Direction & Speed):\nClimate (Snow, Rain): Humidity:\nWas Incident preceded by a rapid weather change? Yes No\nWeather Conditions Prior to Incident (Cloud Cover, Ceiling Heights, Snow, Rain, Fog):\nGas Migration Survey N/A\nBar Hole Test of Area: Yes No Equipment Used:\nMethod of Survey (Foundations, Curbs, Manholes, Driveways, Mains, Services) (9 ) (1)\nEnvironment Sensitivity Impact N/A\nLocation (Nearest Rivers, Body of Water, Marshlands, Wildlife Refuge, City Water Supplies that could be or were affected\nby the medium loss):\nThe Rocky Ford Creek was impacted by the Mid Valley spill. The creek is approximately 500' west of the leak site and\ncrude oil reached the creek through a farm tile. The US EPA was responsible for oversite of the creek cleanup.\n(1)\nOPA Contingency Plan Available? Yes No Followed? Yes No\nClass Location/High Consequence Area N/A\nClass Location: 1 2 3 4\nDetermination:\nHCA Area? Yes No N/A\nDetermination: Could affect drinking water\nOdorization Required? Yes No N/A\n9 Plot on site description page\n- 10 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 11>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nPressure Test History N/A\n(Expand List as Necessary)\nReq’d (10\nDeadline Date )Assessment\nTest Date\nTest Medium Pressure\n(psig)\nDuration\n(hrs) % SMYS\nInstallation\nNext\nNext\nMost Recent\nDescribe any problems experienced during the pressure tests.\nInternal Line Inspection/Other Assessment History N/A\n(Expand List as Necessary)\nReq’d (10) Assessment\nDeadline Date\nAssessment\nDate\nType of ILI\nOther Assessment\nIndicated Anomaly\nTool (11\n) 12\nMethod (\n) If yes, describe below\nInitial 2006 MFL/Caliper Yes No\nNext Yes No\nNext Yes No\nMost Recent Yes No\nDescribe any previously indicated anomalies at the failed pipe, and any subsequent pipe inspections (anomaly digs) and remedial\nactions.\nNone\nPre-Failure Conditions and Actions N/A\nWas there a known pre-failure condition requiring (10) the operator to schedule evaluation and remediation?\nYes (describe below or on attachment) No\nIf there was such a known pre-failure condition, had the operator established and adhered to a required (10) evaluation and\nremediation schedule? Describe below or on attachment. Yes No N/A\nPrior to the failure, had the operator performed the required (10) actions to address the threats that are now known to be related to\nthe cause of this failure? Yes No N/A\nList below or on an attachment such operator-identified threats, and operator actions taken prior to the accident.\nDescribe any previously indicated anomalies at the failed pipe, and any subsequent pipe inspections (anomaly digs) and remedial\nactions.\n10 As required of Pipeline Integrity Management regulations in 49CFR Parts 192 and 195\n11 MFL, geometry, crack, etc.\n12 ECDA, ICDA, SCCDA, “other technology,” etc.\n- 11 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 12>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nMaps & Records N/A\nAre Maps and Records Current? (13\n) Yes No\nComments:\nLeak Survey History N/A\nLeak Survey History (Trend Analysis, Leak Plots):\nPipeline Operation History N/A\nDescription (Repair or Leak Reports, Exposed Pipe Reports):\nDid a Safety Related Condition Exist Prior to Failure? Yes No Reported? Yes No\nUnaccounted For Gas:\nOver & Short/Line Balance (24 hr., Weekly, Monthly/Trend):\nOperator/Contractor Error N/A\nName: Job Function:\nTitle: Years of Experience:\nTraining (Type of Training, Background):\nWas the person “Operator Qualified” as applicable to a precursor abnormal operating condition? Yes No N/A\nWas qualified individual suspended from performing covered task Yes No N/A\nType of Error (Inadvertent Operation of a Valve):\nProcedures that are required:\nActions that were taken:\nPre-Job Meeting (Construction, Maintenance, Blow Down, Purging, Isolation):\nPrevention of Accidental Ignition (Tag & Lock Out, Hot Weld Permit):\nProcedures conducted for Accidental Ignition:\nWas a Company Inspector on the Job? Yes No\n13 Obtain copies of maps and records\n- 12 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 13>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nOperator/Contractor Error N/A\nWas an Inspection conducted on this portion of the job? Yes No\nAdditional Actions (Contributing factors may include number of hours at work prior to failure or time of day work being\nconducted):\nTraining Procedures:\nOperation Procedures:\nController Activities:\nName Title Years\nExperience\nHours on Duty\nPrior to Failure Shift\nAlarm Parameters:\nHigh/Low Pressure Shutdown:\nFlow Rate:\nProcedures for Clearing Alarms:\nType of Alarm:\nCompany Response Procedures for Abnormal Operations:\nOver/Short Line Balance Procedures:\nFrequency of Over/Short Line Balance:\nAdditional Actions:\n- 13 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 14>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nAdditional Actions Taken by the Operator N/A\nMake notes regarding the emergency and Failure Investigation Procedures (Pressure reduction, Reinforced Squeeze Off, Clean\nUp, Use of Evacuators, Line Purging, closing Additional Valves, Double Block and Bleed, Continue Operating downstream\nPumps):\nThe failed branch connection along with approximately 80” length of mainline pipe containing it was cut out. The branch\nconnection was transported to Kiefner and Associates for failure analysis (Appendix 5). The 80” long section of pipe was\nreplaced with pretested pipe and the tie-in girth welds were radiographed. Mid Valley Pipeline initiated a cleanup of the crude\noil near the branch connection. Unfortunately, crude oil found its way into the Rocky Ford Creek and Mid Valley Pipeline\nlaunched an extensive stream cleanup program under the direction of Ohio EPA and US EPA Region 5.\n- 14 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 15>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nPhoto Documentation (1)\nOverall Area from best possible view. Pictures from the four points of the compass. Failed Component, Operator Action, Damages in Area,\nAddress Markings, etc.\nPhoto\nNo.\nRoll\nPhoto\nNo.\nNo.\nDescription Description\nRoll\nNo.\n1 Leak site looking north 1\n2 Leak site looking south 2\n3 Leak site looking south 3\n4 Valve and branch connection 4\n5 Valve and blind flange 5\n6 Location of crack 6\n7 Cracked weld 7\n8 Closeup of cracked weld 8\n9 Cleanup efforts on Rocky Ford Creek 9\n10 Crude oil contamination on creek bank 10\n11 11\n12 12\n13 13\n14 14\n15 15\n16 16\n17 17\n18 18\n19 19\n20 20\n21 21\n22 22\n23 23\n24 24\n25 25\n26 26\n27 27\n28 28\n29 29\n30 30\nType of Camera:\nFilm ASA:\nVideo Counter Log (Attach Copy):\n- 15 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 16>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nAdditional Information Sources\nAgency Name Title Phone Number\nPolice:\nFire Dept.:\nState Fire Marshall:\nState Agency: Dave Schilt Ohio EPA 419-373-3041\nNTSB:\nEPA: Tricia Edwards EPA Region 5 734-692-7687\nFBI:\nATF:\nOSHA:\nInsurance Co.:\nFRA:\nMMS:\nTelevision:\nNewspaper:\nOther:\n- 16 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 17>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nPersons Interviewed\nName Title Phone Number\nLief Jensen Superintendent, Mid Valley Pipeline 313-292-9823\nMark Whalen Supervisor, Mid Valley Pipeline 724-834-2450\nMatt Studer Supervisor, Mid Valley Pipeline 330-603-2846\nChester Wilson Pipeliner, Mid Valley Pipeline 419-236-6887\nDavid Born Compliance Supervisor, Mid Valley\nPipeline 281-637-6497\n- 17 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 18>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nEvent Log\nSequence of events prior, during, and after the incident by time. (Consider the events of all parties involved in the incident, Fire Department and\nPolice reports, Operator Logs and other government agencies.)\nTime Event\n4:55 p.m. Employee discovers leak and notifies SCADA\n4:55 -5:05 p.m. SCADA shuts down pipeline and closes block valves\n5:08 p.m. Notification of operation personnel and leak response\n6:01 p.m. First boom deployed on Rocky Ford Creek at Tank Farm Road\n- 18 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 19>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nInvestigation Contact Log\nTime Date Name Description\n- 19 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 20>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nFailure Investigation Documentation Log\nOperator: Unit #: CPF #: Date:\nAppendix Number Documentation Description\nDate FOIA\nReceived Yes No\n1 Photo Documentation 2/19/09 X\n2 Map and Satellite Photo of Leak Area 2/19/09 X\n3 NRC Report 2/18/09 X\n4 Accident Report 20090076 2/20/09 X\n5 Kiefner and Associates 4/15/09 X\n- 20 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 21>>>\n\nPipeline Failure Investigation Report\nSite Description\nProvide a sketch of the area including distances from roads, houses, stress inducing factors, pipe configurations, etc. Bar Hole Test Survey Plot\nshould be outlined with concentrations at test points. Photos should be taken from all angles with each photo documented. Additional areas\nmay be needed in any area of this guideline.\nRefer to Appendix 2.\n- 21 -\nForm 11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Revised 03/07/08)\n\n<<<PAGE 22>>>\n\nAPPENDIX 1\nPHOTO DOCUMENTATION\n\n<<<PAGE 23>>>\n\nPhoto 1 – View looking north from leak site. Tanks visible in the photo are no longer in service.\nThe arrow points to Tank Farm Road.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 24>>>\n\nPhoto 2 – View from leak site looking south. Visible is the branch connection and 12” valve.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 25>>>\n\nPhoto 3 - The photo shows the view south of the branch connection. The tree line indicates Rocky\nFord Creek. Field tile drain to the south into the Rocky Ford Creek and crude oil did reach the\ncreek through the tile.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 26>>>\n\nPhoto 4 - The photo shows the valve actuator at the branch connection.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 27>>>\n\nPhoto 5 - The photo shows the valve and blinded flange.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 28>>>\n\nPhoto 6 - The photo shows origin of the leak. The arrow points to the crack.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 29>>>\n\nPhoto 7 - The photo shows the weld between the mainline pipe and the branch connection.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 30>>>\n\nPhoto 8 - The photo shows the crack. Note the crack does contain some dirt as the result of the\nexcavation.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 31>>>\n\nPhoto 9 - The photo show booms in the Rocky Ford Creek just downstream of the Tank Farm\nRoad.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 32>>>\n\nPhoto 10 - The photo shows the crude oil contamination along the banks of the Rocky Ford Creek.\nDate Taken: 2-19-2009\nTaken By: Gery Bauman\n\n<<<PAGE 33>>>\n\nAPPENDIX 2\nMAP AND SATELLITE PHOTO OF LEAK AREA\n\n<<<PAGE 34>>>\n\nMid Valley Pipeline Company – System Map\nMid Valley Pipeline Company is represented by red crude oil pipeline line. Sunoco Logistics is the owner of Mid Valley Pipeline\n\n<<<PAGE 35>>>\n\n64)\nCR-Z\nMcClure\n189\nBowling Green\n105\n199)\n600-\nGibsonburg\nSand Ridge Rd\nSand RidgeRte.\nCloverdale\nCR-L\nWeston\nHelena\nPortage,\n65\nUPTe\nMiton\n25)\nBradher\nSANDUSKY\nHENRY\nCustar\nWingston\nRudolph\nw od\nBays\n(281\nBays Rd Risingsun\n1231\nMVPL Cygnet Pump Station\nWest\n- 11-\nBurgoon Rd\nHammansburg,\nCygnet Rd\nMilgrove\nSt John's\nMitchell\n*Eloom Center\nDeshler\nHoytville\n2\nPerry Center\n[MVPL Leak site\nNorth Battinore 18\nBairdstown Bloomdale\n84\n(12\n592\nBelmore\nFostoria\n203]\nVan Buren\n65\nPortage\nCenter\n(613\n18) SENE GA\nTownmood\n19\n254]\nBascom\neipsic\nWest\nPUTNA\nLeipsic\nM\nMcComb\n613\n235)\n186)\nHAN\nC K\n95-\nIndependence\nWest\n-(330\n(23\n687\nPutnam County\n(75\n224\nAlvada\n591\n_New Riegel\n-14\nCopyright © 2005 Microsoft Corp. and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved.\n+ Airport\n12]\n\"Findlay\nFrenchtown\n\n<<<PAGE 36>>>\n\nTrombler\n25\n• Cygnet\nSolether Rd\nLoe Rd\nMears Rd\nCR-608\nUnion St\nCygnet Rd\nFreyman Rd\nTownship Hwy 89\nMVPL Cygnet Pump Station\nHammansburg Rd\nTank Farm Rd\nBloom\nCenter\nTank Farm Rd\nBairdstown Rd\nGrant Rd\nMVPL Leak site\nOil Center Rd:\nOi Center\nCopyright ©2005 Microsoft Corp. andior its suppliers. All rights reserved.\n\n<<<PAGE 37>>>\n\nHorizontal arrow points to the Mid-Valley Pipeline Cygnet Pump Station; Vertical arrow points to the\nleak site.\n\n<<<PAGE 38>>>\n\nAPPENDIX 3\nNRC REPORT\n\n<<<PAGE 39>>>\n\nPage 1 of 2\nNATIONAL RESPONSE CENTER 1-800-424-8802\n*** For Public Use ***\nInformation released to a third party shall comply with any\napplicable federal and/or state Freedom of Information and Privacy Laws\nIncident Report # 897885\nINCIDENT DESCRIPTION\n*Report taken at 17:24 on 18-FEB-09\nIncident Type: PIPELINE\nIncident Cause: UNKNOWN\nAffected Area: ROCKY FORGE RIVER\nThe incident was discovered on 18-FEB-09 at 17:00 local time.\nAffected Medium: WATER\n____________________________________________________________________________\nSUSPECTED RESPONSIBLE PARTY\nOrganization: MID VALLEY PIPELINE\nCYGNAT, OH 43413\nType of Organization: PRIVATE ENTERPRISE\n____________________________________________________________________________\nINCIDENT LOCATION\n5152 ROCK RIDGE ROAD County: WOOD\nCity: CYGNAT State: OH Zip: 43413\nSOUTH OF ADDRESS BUT THE INCIDENT IS STILL ON THEIR PROPERTY.\n____________________________________________________________________________\nRELEASED MATERIAL(S)\nCHRIS Code: OIL Official Material Name: OIL: CRUDE\nAlso Known As:\nQty Released: 0 UNKNOWN AMOUNT Qty in Water: 0 UNKNOWN AMOUNT\n________________________________________________________________________\nDESCRIPTION OF INCIDENT\nCALLER IS REPORTING A RELEASE OF CRUDE OIL FROM PIPELINE DUE TO UNKNOWN CAUSES. THE\nRELEASE WENT ONTO THE GROUND AND INTO THE ROCKY FORGE RIVER. THE AMOUNT SPILLED IS\nUNKNOWN BUT IT IS ESTIMATED TO BE AROUND 50 BARRELS.\n____________________________________________________________________________\nINCIDENT DETAILS\nPipeline Type: TRANSMISSION\nDOT Regulated: YES\nPipeline Above/Below Ground: BELOW\nExposed or Under Water: NO\nPipeline Covered: UNKNOWN\n---WATER INFORMATION---\nBody of Water: ROCKY FORGE RIVER\nTributary of: PORTIS RIVER\nNearest River Mile Marker:\nWater Supply Contaminated: UNKNOWN\n____________________________________________________________________________\nDAMAGES\nFire Involved: NO Fire Extinguished: UNKNOWN\nINJURIES: NO Hospitalized: Empl/Crew: Passenger:\nFATALITIES: NO Empl/Crew: Passenger: Occupant:\nEVACUATIONS: NO Who Evacuated: Radius/Area:\nDamages: NO\nLength of Direction of\nClosure Type Description of Closure Closure Closure\nAir: N\nRoad: N Major\nArtery: N\nWaterway: N\nhttp://www.nrc.uscg.mil/reports/rwservlet?standard\nweb+inc\n_\n_\nseq=897885\n11/15/2010\n\n<<<PAGE 40>>>\n\nPage 2 of 2\nTrack: N\nPassengers Transferred: NO\nEnvironmental Impact: NO\nMedia Interest: NONE Community Impact due to Material:\n____________________________________________________________________________\nREMEDIAL ACTIONS\nSTOPPED THE SOURCE. BOOMS PLACED IN THE RIVER.\nRelease Secured: YES\nRelease Rate:\nEstimated Release Duration:\n____________________________________________________________________________\nWEATHER\nWeather: RAINY, 40ºF Wind speed: 10 MPH Wind direction: SSE\n____________________________________________________________________________\nADDITIONAL AGENCIES NOTIFIED\nFederal: EPA\nState/Local: NONE\nState/Local On Scene: NONE\nState Agency Number: NONE\n____________________________________________________________________________\nNOTIFICATIONS BY NRC\nATLANTIC STRIKE TEAM (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nUSCG HSOC AT DHS (USCG HSOC DESK)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nUSCG ICC (ICC ONI)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nINFO FOR CRITICAL MFG SECTOR (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nDOT CRISIS MANAGEMENT CENTER (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nU.S. EPA V (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:34\nFLD INTEL SUPPORT TEAM DETROIT (COMMAND CENTER)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nNATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE COORD CTR (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nNOAA RPTS FOR OH (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nOHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (OHDOH)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nPIPELINE & HAZMAT SAFETY ADMIN (OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY (AUTO))\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nOH EPA ATTN: DUTY OFFICER (MAIN OFFICE)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\nUSCG DISTRICT 9 (COMMAND CENTER)\n18-FEB-09 17:33\n____________________________________________________________________________\nADDITIONAL INFORMATION\nCALLER HAS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.\n___________________________________________________________________________\n*** END INCIDENT REPORT # 897885 ***\nhttp://www.nrc.uscg.mil/reports/rwservlet?standard\nweb+inc\n_\n_\nseq=897885\n11/15/2010\n\n<<<PAGE 41>>>\n\nAPPENDIX 4\nACCIDENT REPORT 20090076\n\n<<<PAGE 42>>>\n\nNOTICE: This report is required by 49 CFR Part 195. Failure to report can result in a civil penalty not to exceed $25,000 for each violation for each day that such violation persists except that the maximum civil penalty shall not exceed $500,000 as provided in 49 USC 60122 Form Approved\nOMB No. 2137-0047\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nResearch and Special Programs\nAdministration\nACCIDENT REPORT – HAZARDOUS LIQUID\nPIPELINE SYSTEMS\nReport Date\nNo.\n(DOT Use Only)\nINSTRUCTIONS\nImportant: Please read the separate instructions for completing this form before you begin. They clarify the\ninformation requested and provide specific examples. If you do not have a copy of the instructions,\nyou can obtain one from the Office Of Pipeline Safety Web Page at http://ops.dot.gov.\nPART A – GENERAL REPORT INFORMATION\nOriginal Report Supplemental Report Final Report\n1. a. Operator's OPS 5-digit Identification Number (if known) / ____________/\n2. b. If Operator does not own the pipeline, enter Owner’s OPS 5-digit Identification Number (if known) / ___ /\nc. Name of Operator ______________________________________________________________________________________\nd. Operator street address _______________________________________________________________________________\ne. Operator address ______________________________________________________________________________________\nCity, County, State and Zip Code\nIMPORTANT: IF THE SPILL IS SMALL, THAT IS, THE AMOUNT IS AT LEAST 5 GALLONS BUT IS LESS THAN 5 BARRELS,\nCOMPLETE THIS PAGE ONLY, UNLESS THE SPILL IS TO WATER AS DESCRIBED IN 49 CFR §195.52(A)(4) OR IS OTHERWISE\nREPORTABLE UNDER §195.50 AS REVISED IN CY 2001.\n2. Time and date of the accident\n/ / / / / / / /\nhr. month day year\n3. Location of accident\n(If offshore, do not complete a through d. See Part C.1)\na. Latitude: _____ Longitude:\n__________\n(if not available, see instructions for how to provide specific location)\nb. _________________________________________________\nCity, and County or Parish\nc. _________________________________________________\nState and Zip Code\nd. Mile post/valve station or survey station no.\n(whichever gives more accurate location)\n_________________________________\n4. Telephone report\n/ / / / / / / /\nNRC Report Number month day year\n5. Losses (Estimated)\nPublic/Community Losses reimbursed by operator:\nPublic/private property damage $_______________\nCost of emergency response phase $_______________\nCost of environmental remediation $_______________\nOther Costs $_______________\n(describe) _____________________________________\nOperator Losses:\nValue of product lost $_______________\nValue of operator property damage $_______________\nOther Costs $_______________\n(describe) _____________________________________\nTotal Costs $_______________\n6. Commodity Spilled Yes No\n(If Yes, complete Parts a through c where applicable)\na. Name of commodity spilled ___________________________\nb. Classification of commodity spilled:\nHVLs /other flammable or toxic fluid which is a gas at ambient conditions\nCO2 or other non-flammable, non-toxic fluid which is a gas at ambient conditions\nGasoline, diesel, fuel oil or other petroleum product which is a liquid at ambient conditions\nCrude oil\nc. Estimated amount of commodity\ninvolved :\nBarrels\nGallons (check only if spill is\nless than one barrel)\nAmounts:\nSpilled : ____________\nRecovered: ____________\nCAUSES FOR SMALL SPILLS ONLY (5 gallons to under 5 barrels) : (For large spills [5 barrels or greater] see Part H)\nCorrosion Natural Forces Excavation Damage Other Outside Force Damage\nMaterial and/or Weld Failures Equipment Incorrect Operation Other\nPART B – PREPARER AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE\n(type or print) Preparer's Name and Title Preparer's E-mail Address Area Code and Telephone Number\nArea Code and Facsimile Number\nAuthorized Signature (type or print) Name and Title Date Area Code and Telephone Number\nForm RSPA F 7000-1 ( 01-2001 ) Page 1 of 4\nOPS Data Facsimile\n\n<<<PAGE 43>>>\n\nPART C – ORIGIN OF THE ACCIDENT (Check all that apply)\n1. Additional location information\na. Line segment name or ID _______________________\nb. Accident on Federal land other than Outer Continental\nShelf Yes No\nc. Is pipeline interstate? Yes No\nOffshore: Yes No (complete d if offshore)\nd. Area ___________________ Block # ______________\nState / / or Outer Continental Shelf\n2. Location of system involved (check all that apply)\nOperator’s Property\nPipeline Right of Way\nHigh Consequence Area (HCA)?\nDescribe HCA____________________________________\n3. Part of system involved in accident\nAbove Ground Storage Tank\nCavern or other below ground storage facility\nPump/meter station; terminal/tank farm piping and\nequipment, including sumps\nOther Specify: _________________________________\nOnshore pipeline, including valve sites\nOffshore pipeline, including platforms\nIf failure occurred on Pipeline, complete items a - g:\n4. Failure occurred on\nBody of Pipe Pipe Seam Scraper Trap\nPump Sump Joint\nComponent Valve Metering Facility\nRepair Sleeve Welded Fitting Bolted Fitting\nGirth Weld\nOther (specify)\nYear the component that failed was installed: / /\n5. Maximum operating pressure (MOP)\na. Estimated pressure at point and time of accident:\n____ PSIG\nb. MOP at time of accident:\n___________PSIG\nc. Did an overpressurization occur relating to the accident?\nYes No\na. Type of leak or rupture\nLeak: Pinhole Connection Failure (complete sec. H5)\nPuncture, diameter (inches) _________\nRupture: Circumferential – Separation\nLongitudinal – Tear/Crack, length (inches) __________\nPropagation Length, total, both sides (feet) _________\nN/A\nOther _______________________________\nb.Type of block valve used for isolation of immediate section:\nUpstream: Manual Automatic Remote Control\nCheck Valve\nDownstream: Manual Automatic Remote Control\nCheck Valve\nc. Length of segment isolated _______ ft\nd. Distance between valves _______ ft\ne. Is segment configured for internal inspection tools? Yes No\nf. Had there been an in-line inspection device run at the point of\nfailure? Yes No Don’t Know\nNot Possible due to physical constraints in the system\ng. If Yes, type of device run (check all that apply)\nHigh Resolution Magnetic Flux tool Year run: ______\nLow Resolution Magnetic Flux tool Year run: ______\nUT tool Year run: ______\nGeometry tool Year run: ______\nCaliper tool Year run: ______\nCrack tool Year run: ______\nHard Spot tool Year run: ______\nOther tool Year run: ______\nPART D – MATERIAL SPECIFICATION PART E – ENVIRONMENT\n1. Nominal pipe size (NPS) / / in.\n2. Wall thickness / / in.\n3. Specification SMYS / /\n4. Seam type\n5. Valve type\n6. Manufactured by in year / /\n1. Area of accident In open ditch\nUnder pavement Above ground\nUnderground Under water\nInside/under building Other ____________\n2. Depth of cover: inches\nPART F – CONSEQUENCES\n1. Consequences (check and complete all that apply)\na. Fatalities Injuries c. Product ignited Yes No d. Explosion Yes No\nNumber of operator employees: _______ _______ e. Evacuation (general public only) / / people\nContractor employees working for operator: _______ _______ Reason for Evacuation:\nGeneral public: _______ _______ Precautionary by company\nTotals: _______ _______ Evacuation required or initiated by public official\nb. Was pipeline/segment shutdown due to leak? Yes No f. Elapsed time until area was made safe:\nIf Yes, how long? ______ days ______ hours _____ minutes / / hr. / / min.\n2. Environmental Impact\na. Wildlife Impact: Fish/aquatic Yes No e. Water Contamination: Yes No (If Yes, provide the following)\nBirds Yes No Amount in water _________ barrels\nTerrestrial Yes No Ocean/Seawater No Yes\nb. Soil Contamination Yes No Surface No Yes\nIf Yes, estimated number of cubic yards: _________\nGroundwater No Yes\nc. Long term impact assessment performed: Yes No Drinking water No Yes (If Yes, check below.)\nd. Anticipated remediation Yes No Private well Public water intake\nIf Yes, check all that apply: Surface water Groundwater Soil Vegetation Wildlife\nForm RSPA F 7000-1 ( 01-2001 ) OPS Data Facsimile\nPage 2 of 4\n\n<<<PAGE 44>>>\n\nPART G – LEAK DETECTION INFORMATION\n1. Computer based leak detection capability in place? 2. Was the release initially detected by? (check one): Yes No\nCPM/SCADA-based system with leak detection\nStatic shut-in test or other pressure or leak test\nLocal operating personnel, procedures or equipment\nRemote operating personnel, including controllers\nAir patrol or ground surveillance\nA third party Other (specify) _________________\n3. Estimated leak duration days ____ hours ____\nPART H – APPA","truncated":true,"body_characters":44856}