COLUMBIA GAS OF PENNSYLVANIA

Incident Narrative

ON OCTOBER 15, 2023, COLUMBIA BEGAN RECEIVING ""NO GAS"" CALLS FROM CUSTOMERS IN ECONOMY, PA. SERVICE TECHNICIANS REPORTED NORMAL PRESSURE BUT ALSO REPORTED EVIDENCE OF AIR IN THE SYSTEM. THIS CONTINUED THROUGHOUT THE MORNING. COLUMBIA'S SYSTEMS WERE SUPPLIED BY A LOCAL PRODUCER IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE MEDIUM PRESSURE SYSTEMS. IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT A SLUG OF AIR ENTERED COLUMBIA'S SYSTEM FROM THE MERIDIAN WELL PURCHASE POINT, AND THEREFORE, FOR SAFETY REASONS, GAS WAS TURNED OFF TO THE TWO MEDIUM PRESSURE SYSTEMS SO THE AIR COULD BE PURGED FROM THE SYSTEMS. THIS AFFECTED 3,728 CUSTOMERS. THERE WERE TWO MEDIUM PRESSURE SYSTEMS AFFECTED. PART E (ADDITIONAL OPERATING INFORMATION) DOES NOT ALLOW THE INCLUSION OF TWO SYSTEMS. BELOW IS THE REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR THE SECOND SYSTEM: E1. ESTIMATED PRESSURE AT THE POINT AND TIME OF THE INCIDENT (PSIG) 21 E2. NORMAL OPERATING PRESSURE AT THE POINT AND TIME OF THE INCIDENT (PSIG) 21 E3. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE OPERATING PRESSURE (MAOP) AT THE POINT AND TIME OF THE INCIDENT (PSIG) 40 E3A. MAOP ESTABLISHED BY 49 CFR SECTION: 192.619 (A)(4) E3B. DATE MAOP ESTABLISHED: 03/20/09. E4. DESCRIBE THE PRESSURE ON THE SYSTEM RELATING TO THE INCIDENT: PRESSURE DID NOT EXCEED MAOP. E5. TYPE OF ODORIZATION SYSTEM FOR GAS AT POINT OF FAILURE: NONE. E6. ODORANT LEVEL NEAR THE POINT OF FAILURE MEASURED AFTER FAILURE: NOT MEASURED E7. WAS SUPERVISORY CONTROL DATA ACQUISITION (SCADA)-BASED SYSTEM IN PLACE ON THE PIPELINE OR FACILITY INVOLVED IN THE INCIDENT? NO. E8. WAS AN INVESTIGATION INITIATED INTO WHETHER OR NOT THE CONTROLLER(S) OR CONTROL ROOM ISSUES WERE THE CAUSE OF OR A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE INCIDENT? NO, THE FACILITY WAS NOT MONITORED BY A CONTROLLER(S) AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT.