Lessons Learned (Major Incident, High High Potential Incident, Recordable Injury, Environmental

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Lessons Learned (Major Incident, High High Potential Incident, Recordable Injury, Environmental

Lessons Learned–Serious Occurrence Report Using a ditching machine – Although other methods/equipment could have been used to prevent damaging a buried line (hydro- Title: PVC Fuel Gas Line Strike vac or hand digging), they are not practical for excavations over large distances as was the case in this incident. Date of Incident: 2 October 2006 Possible System Causes: Business or Performance Unit: NAGas SPU/South  15-15 Communication - Other: Although some lines were marked/located the line that was Location of Incident: Garland Scott 1-44 struck was not known to exist. Function: Construction/Maintenance Resultant Actions: Type of Incident: Line strike Incident while ditching to install  BP Construction Specialist will update documentation to show location & orientation of this 2-inch PVC fuel gas line. electrical service to a pumping unit.  Asset Ground Disturbance Champion will determine that Region/Country: North America/USA current Ground Disturbance training material and instruction adequately addresses the necessity for surveying surface Business Stream: Upstream E&P indicators such as, buildings that may use gas, meters, engines, and that there is a potential for unknown lines near trenches Lesson Origin: Serious Occurrence (SOR) where other lines have been buried.  Questioning of landowner to include – “Do you have any Brief Account of Incident: While excavating with a trenching natural gas supplied equipment, irrigation motors, heaters, etc?” machine, an electrical construction crew working on a BP Knowing where the equipment is and where the fuel source is pumping unit electrification project hit a landowner’s 2” PVC located may not always identify where the lines are located but irrigation fuel gas line. The line had an operating pressure of ~24 will provide additional information to further reduce risk by psig. The landowner met previously with the construction crew noting possible undefined/unmarked lines in the dig area and, if supervisor and identified a water line within the work area and appropriate, will allow the source to be shut-in before digging. several others outside the dig area, but stated: “The water line is the only line that [he was] aware of.” BP, the contractor, the land Key Message: owner, and the rural gas supply company had located their lines In this incident personnel followed the requirements of the as part of a Dig-TESS response, all were outside the ground Ground Disturbance policy to ensure a safe excavation could be disturbance area except the landowner’s water line which was completed; however, following a policy will not always eliminate located and hand exposed before digging. Based upon the line all risk. In many instances there can be unknown factors that markings and the landowner’s statement the BP job sponsor and present hazards. We must, in all cases, step back and look for the construction crew believed there were no other lines inside the “unknowns” that may pose a risk to the safe operations on any job ground disturbance zone. site. Recognize that landowners may not know about the existence of every line buried on their property, so ask the Actual or Potential Outcome: There were no injuries or fire question, “What equipment do you have that uses natural gas, associated with this incident. The ditching machine operator electricity, water, etc?” If these lines are deemed to be within the felt the machine “bump” the line and at the same time the line dig area, then make sure the lines are identified and/or the source broke releasing 39mcf of gas. The operator immediately shut the shut-in before digging. machine down and evacuated upwind to a safe location. The BP job sponsor was notified and within 15 minutes was able to locate and shut in the gas source.

Golden Rules: Ground Disturbance (All underground hazards were not identified, located and if necessary, isolated.)

What Went Wrong: Possible Immediate Causes  3-9 Use of Protective Methods - Other: Method for locating unknown, non-metallic lines, not used  5-1 Protective Systems - Inadequate guards or protective devices : No tracer wire or above ground marker was available to aid in locating the PVC line.  7-8 Work Exposure to- Mechanical Hazards:

For Additional Information Contact: Dan Lawson- Anadarko OC Manager (806) 371-4494

Recommended publications