PHMSA Report 20120058
PHMSA Report 20120058
Gas transmission and gathering incident in ARVIN, KERN County, CA. Reported cause: EQUIPMENT FAILURE. Reported consequences: 0 fatalities, 0 injuries, 585457 NATURAL GAS released, $488,000 reported property damage. Operator-reported incident data submitted to PHMSA, generally within 30 days. Records may be supplemented or corrected and do not represent final agency causal findings.
Report number: 20120058.
Operator ID: 840.
Reported incident date: 5/2/2012 8:20.
Location detail: 118+1904
Cause detail: OTHER EQUIPMENT FAILURE
Cause detail: MOJAVE PIPELINE OPERATING COMPANY GAS CONTROL PERSONAL ENCOUNTERED A PRESSURE DROP VIA SCADA INFORMATION ON THE MOJAVE PIPELINE. LOCAL OPERATING PERSONNEL IN THE VICINITY OF ARVIN, CA, WERE DISPATCHED AND FOUND THAT A FABRICATION OF RELIEF VALVES AND PIPE SUPPORTS HAD FAILED, CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE MOJAVE FACILITY AND SOME SURROUNDING CHERRY TREES. THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE ROOT CAUSE OF REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: THE INADEQUACY OF THE STRUCTURAL SUPPORT PROVIDED AT THIS INSTALLATION AND ITS FAILURE ALLOWED FOR THE FAILURE OF THE PIPING SYSTEMS IT WAS INTENDED TO PROTECT. - UNDERSIZED STRUCTURAL MEMBERS IN SUPPORT TO WITHSTAND PREDICTED FORCES OF VENTING - INCORRECT ORIENTATION OF SUPPORT COLUMNS AND CROSS MEMBER (WEAK AXIS EXPOSED) - CONNECTION BETWEEN PIPE AND SUPPORT DIDNOT INSURE TRANSFER OF FORCES THE RELIEF VALVES WERE FOUND NOT TO HAVE HEIGHTENED THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE GAS RELEASE NOR DID THEY ADD TO THE IMPACT OF THE RELEASE, SO THEY WERE NOT CONTRIBUTING FACTORS AS DEFINED BY PHMSA.
PHMSA trend classification: significant incident, not serious.
PHMSA standardized cause: EQUIPMENT FAILURE — OTHER EQUIPMENT FAILURE.
PHMSA indexed costs: $1,475,643 reported total cost, $1,074,403.984 in 1984 dollars, $1,652,205.803 in current-year dollars.
PHMSA trend flags, standardized causes, and indexed costs are analytical fields added to operator-reported incident data. They do not represent final agency causal findings.
This material provides agency context. It does not replace binding regulatory text, and its legal effect depends on the underlying authority and facts.