MO-88795_95827_CA_O_20200913_PHMSA Report

NOTICE: This report is required by 49 CFR Part 195. Failure to report can result in a civil penalty not to
exceed $100,000 for each violation for each day that such violation persists except that the maximum civil
penalty shall not exceed $1,000,000 as provided in 49 USC 60122.
OMB NO: 2137-0047
EXPIRATION DATE: 8/31/2020
U.S Department of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Original Report
Date:
09/13/2020
No.
20200253 34271
--------------------------
DOT Use Only)
ACCIDENT REPORT - HAZARDOUS LIQUID
PIPELINE SYSTEMS
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid
OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2137-0047. All responses to the collection of information are mandatory.
Send comments regarding this burden or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden to: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, PHMSA, Office of Pipeline Safety PHP-30 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, D.C. 20590.
INSTRUCTIONS
Important. Please read the separate instructions for completing this form before you begin. They clarify the information requested and provide specific
examples. If you do not have a copy of the instructions, you can obtain one from the PHMSA Pipeline Safety Community Web Page at http://www. phmsa.
dot. aov/ppeline/library/forms.
PART A - KEY REPORT INFORMATION
Report Type: (select all that apply)
Original:
Supplemental:
Final:
Yes
Last Revision Date:
09/14/2020
1. Operator's OPS-issued Operator Identification Number OPID :
2552
2. Name of Operator
COLONIAL PIPELINE CO
3. Address of Operator:
3a. Street Address
1185 SANCTUARY PARKWAY SUITE 100
3b. City
ALPHARETTA
3c. State
Georgia
3d. Zip Code
30009-4765
4. Local time 24-hr clock and date of the Accident:
08/14/2020 18:20
5. Location of Accident:
Latitude / Longitude
35.414106,-80.806185
6. National Response Center Report Number if applicable):
1284598
7. Local time (24-hr clock) and date of initial telephonic report to the
National Response Center if applicable):
08/14/2020 19:42
8. Commodity released: (select only one, based on predominant
volume released)
Refined and/or Petroleum Product (non-HVL) which is a
Liquid at Ambient Conditions
- Specify Commodity Subtype:
Gasoline non -Ethanol
- If "Other" Subtype, Describe:
- If Biofuel/Alternative Fuel and Commodity Subtype is
Ethanol Blend, then % Ethanol Blend:
- If Biofuel/Alternative Fuel and Commodity Subtype is
Biodiesel, then Biodiesel Blend e.g. B2, B20, B100
9. Estimated volume of commodity released unintentional) (Barrels):
6,490.00
10. Estimated volume of intentional and/or controlled release/blowdown
(Barrels):
11. Estimated volume of commodity recovered (Barrels):
3,094.00
12. Were there fatalities?
No
- If Yes, specify the number in each category:
12a. Operator employees
12b. Contractor employees working for the Operator
12c. Non -Operator emergency responders
12d. Workers working on the right-of-way, but NOT
associated with this Operator
12e. General public
12f. Total fatalities sum of above
13. Were there injuries requiring inpatient hospitalization?
No
- If Yes, specify the number in each category:
13a. Operator employees
13b. Contractor employees working for the Operator
13c. Non -Operator emergency responders
13d. Workers working on the right-of-way, but NOT
associated with this Operator
13e. General public
13f. Total injuries sum of above
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

14. Was the pipeline/facility pipeline/facilityshut down due to the Accident?
Yes
- If No, Explain:
- If Yes, complete Questions 14a and 14b: use local time, 24-hr clock
14a. Local time and date of shutdown:
08/14/2020 18:43
14b. Local time pipeline/facility restarted:
08/19/2020 21:00
- Still shut down? * Supplemental Report Required)
15. Did the commodity ignite?
No
16. Did the commodity explode?
No
17. Number of general public evacuated:
0
18. Time sequence use local time, 24-hour clock):
18a. Local time Operator identified Accident - effective 7- 2014
changed to "Local time Operator identified failure":
08/14/2020 18:20
18b. Local time Operator resources arrived on site:
08/14/2020 18:42
PART B - ADDITIONAL LOCATION INFORMATION
1. Was the origin of the Accident onshore? Yes
If Yes, Complete lete Questions 2-12
If No, Complete Questions 13-15
- If Onshore:
2. State:
North Carolina
3. Zip Code:
28078
4. City
Huntersville
5. County or Parish
Mecklenburg
6. Operator -designated location:
Milepost/Valve Station
Specify:
ROW
7. Pipeline/Facility name:
L01
8. Segment name/ID:
Charlotte to Kanna olis
9. Was Accident on Federal land, other than the Outer Continental Shelf
OCS ?
No
10. Location of Accident:
Pi eline Ri ht-of-way
11. Area of Accident as found):
Underground
Specify:
Under soil
- If Other, Describe:
Depth -of -Cover (in):
36
12. Did Accident occur in a crossing?
No
- If Yes, specify a below:
- If Bridge crossing —
Cased/ Uncased:
- If Railroad crossing —
Cased/ Uncased/ Bored/drilled
- If Road crossing —
Cased/ Uncased/ Bored/drilled
- If Water crossing —
Cased/ Uncased
- Name of body of water, if common) known:
- Approx. water depth ftat the point of the Accident:
- Select:
- If Offshore:
13. Approximate water depth ftat the point of the Accident:
14. Origin of Accident:
- In State waters - Specify:
- State:
- Area:
- Block/Tract #:
- Nearest County/Parish:
- On the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) - Specify:
- Area:
- Block #:
15. Area of Accident:
PART C - ADDITIONAL FACILITY INFORMATION
1. Is the pipeline or facility:
Interstate
2. Part of system involved in Accident:
Onshore Pipeline, Including Valve Sites
- If Onshore Breakout Tank or Storage Vessel, Including Attached
Appurtenances, specify:
3. Item involved in Accident:
Pipe
- If Pipe, specify:
Pipe Body
3a. Nominal diameter of pipe (in):
40
3b. Wall thickness (in):
.312
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

3c. SMYS (Specified Minimum Yield Strength) of pipe (psi):
60,000
3d. Pipe specification:
API 5L
3e. Pipe Seam, specify:
DSAW
- If Other, Describe:
3f. Pipe manufacturer:
Bethlehem Steel
3 . Year of manufacture:
1978
3h. Pipeline coating type at point of Accident, specify:
Coal Tar
- If Other, Describe:
- If Weld, including heat -affected zone, specify. If Pipe Girth Weld,
3a through 3h above are required:
- If Other, Describe:
- If Valve, specify:
- If Mainline, specify:
- If Other, Describe:
3i. Manufactured by:
3'. Year of manufacture:
- If Tank/Vessel, specify:
- If Other - Describe:
- If Other, describe:
4. Year item involved in Accident was installed:
1978
5. Material involved in Accident:
Carbon Steel
- If Material other than Carbon Steel, specify:
6. Type of Accident Involved:
Leak
- If Mechanical Puncture — Specify Approx. size:
in. axial b
in. circumferential
- If Leak - Select Type:
Other
- If Other, Describe:
Under Investigation
- If Rupture - Select Orientation:
If Other, Describe:
Approx. size: in. widest opening) b
in. (length circumferential) or axial)
- If Other — Describe:
PART D - ADDITIONAL CONSEQUENCE INFORMATION
1. Wildlife impact: Yes
1 a. If Yes, specify all that apply:
- Fish/aquatic
- Birds
- Terrestrial
Yes
2. Soil contamination:
Yes
3. Long term impact assessment performed or Tanned:
Yes
4. Anticipated remediation:
Yes
4a. If Yes, specify all that apply:
- Surface water
- Groundwater
Yes
- Soil
Yes
- Vegetation
- Wildlife
5. Water contamination:
Yes
5a. If Yes, specify all that apply:
- Ocean/Seawater
- Surface
- Groundwater
Yes
- Drinking water: Select one or both)
- Private Well
- Public Water Intake
5b. Estimated amount released in or reaching water (Barrels):
3,714.00
5c. Name of body of water, if common) known:
NA
6. At the location of this Accident, had the pipeline segment or facility
been identified as one that "could affect" a High Consequence Area
HCA as determined in the Operators Integrity Management Program?
No
7. Did the released commodity reach or occur in one or more High
Consequence Area (HCA)?
No
7a. If Yes, specify HCA t e s : Select all that apply)
- Commercially Navigable Waterway:
Was this HCA identified in the "could affect"
determination for this Accident site in the Operator's
Integrity Management Program?
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

- High Population Area:
Was this HCA identified in the "could affect"
determination for this Accident site in the Operator's
Integrity Management Program?
- Other Populated Area
Was this HCA identified in the "could affect" determination
for this Accident site in the Operator's Integrity
Management Program?
- Unusually Sensitive Area USA - Drinking Water
Was this HCA identified in the "could affect" determination
for this Accident site in the Operator's Integrity
Management Program?
- Unusually Sensitive Area USA - Ecological
Was this HCA identified in the "could affect" determination
for this Accident site in the Operator's Integrity
Management Program?
8. Estimated cost to Operator — effective 12-2012, changed to "Estimated
Property Damage":
8a. Estimated cost of public and non -Operator private property
damage paid/reimbursed by the Operator — effective 12-2012,
$ 0
"paid/reimbursed by the Operator" removed
8b. Estimated cost of commodity lost
$ 351,000
8c. Estimated cost of Operators property damage & repairs
$ 3,500,000
8d. Estimated cost of Operator's emergency response
$ 2,500,000
8e. Estimated cost of Operator's environmental remediation
$ 2,600,000
8f. Estimated other costs
$ 1,400,000
Describe:
Misc.
8g. Estimated total costs (sum of above) — effective 12-2012,
$ 10,351,000
changed to "Total estimated property damage sum of above)"
PART E - ADDITIONAL OPERATING INFORMATION
1. Estimated pressure at the point and time of the Accident (psi :
183.00
2. Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP) at the point and time of the
673.00
Accident (psi :
3. Describe the pressure on the system or facility relating to the
Pressure did not exceed MOP
Accident (psi :
4. Not including pressure reductions required by PHMSA regulations
(such as for repairs and pipe movement), was the system or facility
relating to the Accident operating under an established pressure
No
restriction with pressure limits below those normally allowed by the
MOP?
- If Yes, Complete 4.a and 4.b below:
4a. Did the pressure exceed this established pressure
restriction?
4b. Was this pressure restriction mandated by PHMSA or the
State?
5. Was "Onshore Pipeline, Including Valve Sites" OR "Offshore
Pipeline, Including Riser and Riser Bend" selected in PART C, Question
Yes
2?
- If Yes - (Complete 5a. — 5f below) effective 12-2012, changed to "(Complete 5.a — 5.e below)"
5a. Type of upstream valve used to initially isolate release
Remotely Controlled
source:
5b. Type of downstream valve used to initially isolate release
Remotely Controlled
source:
5c. Length of segment isolated between valves (ft):
93,000
5d. Is the pipeline configured to accommodate internal
Yes
inspection tools?
- If No, Which physical features limit tool accommodation?
select all that apply)
- Changes in line pipe diameter
- Presence of unsuitable mainline valves
- Tight or mitered pipe bends
- Other passage restrictions (i.e. unbarred tee's,
projecting instrumentation, etc.
- Extra thick pipe wall (applicable only for magnetic
flux leakage internal inspection tools
-Other -
- If Other, Describe:
5e. For this pipeline, are there operational factors which
significantly complicate the execution of an internal inspection tool
No
run?
- If Yes, Which operational factors complicate execution? select all that a 1
- Excessive debris or scale, wax, or other wall buildup
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

- Low operating pressure(s)
- Low flow or absence of flow
- Incompatible commodity
- Other -
- If Other, Describe:
5f. Function of pipeline system:
> 20% SMYS Regulated Trunkline/Transmission
6. Was a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)-based
Yes
system in place on the pipeline or facility involved in the Accident?
If Yes -
6a. Was it operating at the time of the Accident?
Yes
6b. Was it fully functional at the time of the Accident?
Yes
6c. Did SCADA-based information (such as alarm(s),
alert(s), event(s), and/or volume calculations) assist with
No
the detection of the Accident?
6d. Did SCADA-based information (such as alarm(s),
alert(s), event(s), and/or volume calculations) assist with
No
the confirmation of the Accident?
7. Was a CPM leak detection system in place on the pipeline or facility
No
involved in the Accident?
- If Yes:
7a. Was it operating at the time of the Accident?
7b. Was it fully functional at the time of the Accident?
7c. Did CPM leak detection system information (such as alarm
(s), alert(s), event(s), and/or volume calculations) assist with
the detection of the Accident?
7d. Did CPM leak detection system information (such as alarm
(s), alert(s), event(s), and/or volume calculations) assist with
the confirmation of the Accident?
8. How was the Accident initially identified for the Operator?
Notification From Public
- If Other, Specify:
8a. If "Controller", "Local Operating Personnel", including
contractors", "Air Patrol", or "Ground Patrol by Operator or its
contractor" is selected in Question 8, specify:
9. Was an investigation initiated into whether or not the controller(s) or
No, the Operator did not find that an investigation of the
control room issues were the cause of or a contributing factor to the
controller(s) actions or control room issues was necessary
Accident?
due to: (provide an explanation for why the Operator did not
investigate)
- If No, the Operator did not find that an investigation of the
controller(s) actions or control room issues was necessary due to:
Not contributing factors.
(provide an explanation for why the operator did not investigate)
If Yes, specify investigation results : select all that apply)
- Investigation reviewed work schedule rotations,
continuous hours of service (while working for the
Operator), and other factors associated with fatigue
- Investigation did NOT review work schedule rotations,
continuous hours of service (while working for the
Operator), and other factors associated with fatigue
Provide an explanation for why not:
Investigation identified no control room issues
Investigation identified no controller issues
Investigation identified incorrect controller action or
controller error
- Investigation identified that fatigue may have affected the
controller(s) involved or impacted the involved controller(s)
response
Investigation identified incorrect procedures
Investigation identified incorrect control room equipment
operation
- Investigation identified maintenance activities that affected
control room operations, procedures, and/or controller
response
Investigation identified areas other than those above:
Describe:
PART F - DRUG & ALCOHOL TESTING INFORMATION
1. As a result of this Accident, were any Operator employees tested
under the post -accident drug and alcohol testing requirements of DOT's
No
Drug & Alcohol Testing regulations?
- If Yes:
la. Specify how many were tested:
1 b. Specify how many failed:
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

2. As a result of this Accident, were any Operator contractor employees
tested under the post -accident drug and alcohol testing requirements of
DOT's Drug & Alcohol Testing regulations?
No
- If Yes:
2a. Specify how many were tested:
2b. Specify how many failed:
PART G — APPARENT CAUSE
Select only one box from PART G in shaded column on left representing the APPARENT Cause of the Accident, and answer
the questions on the right. Describe secondary, contributing or root causes of the Accident in the narrative (PART H).
Apparent Cause:
G8 - Other Incident Cause
G1 - Corrosion Failure - only one sub -cause can be picked from shaded left-hand column
Corrosion Failure — Sub -Cause:
- If External Corrosion:
1. Results of visual examination:
If Other, Describe:
2. Type of corrosion: select all that apply)
- Galvanic
- Atmospheric
- Stray Current
- Microbiological
- Selective Seam
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
3. The e s of corrosion selected in Question 2 is based on the followin select all that apply)
- Field examination
- Determined by metallurgical analysis
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
4. Was the failed item buried under the round?
- If Yes:
114a. Was failed item considered to be under cathodic
protection at the time of the Accident?
If Yes - Year protection started:
4b. Was shielding, tenting, or disbonding of coating evident at
the point of the Accident?
4c. Has one or more Cathodic Protection Survey been
conducted at the point of the Accident?
If "Yes, CP Annual Survey" — Most recent year conducted:
If "Yes, Close Interval Survey" — Most recent year conducted:
If "Yes, Other CP Survey" — Most recent year conducted:
- If No:
4d. Was the failed item externally coated orpainted?
5. Was there observable damage to the coating or paint in the vicinity of
the corrosion?
- If Internal Corrosion:
6. Results of visual examination:
- Other:
7. Type of corrosion select all that apply): -
- Corrosive Commodity
- Water drop-out/Acid
- Microbiological
- Erosion
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
8. The causes of corrosion selected in Question 7 is based on the followin select all that apply): -
- Field examination
- Determined by metallurgical analysis
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
9. Location of corrosion select all that apply): -
- Low point in pipe
- Elbow
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
10. Was the commodity treated with corrosion inhibitors or biocides?
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

11. Was the interior coated or lined with protective coating?
12. Were clean ing/dewatering pigs (or other operations) routinely
utilized?
13. Were corrosion coupons routinely utilized?
Complete the following if any Corrosion Failure sub -cause is selected AND the 'Item Involved in Accident' (from PART C,
Question 3) is Tank/Vessel.
14. List the year of the most recent inspections:
14a. API Std 653 Out -of -Service Inspection
- No Out -of -Service Inspection completed
14b. API Std 653 In -Service Inspection
No In -Service Inspection completed
Complete the following if any Corrosion Failure sub -cause is selected AND the 'Item Involved in Accident' (from PART C,
Question 3) is Pipe or Weld.
15. Has one or more internal inspection tool collected data at the point of the
Accident?
15a. If Yes, for each tool used, select type of internal inspection tool and indicate most recent year run: -
- Magnetic Flux Leakage Tool
Most recent year:
- Ultrasonic
Most recent year:
- Geometry
Most recent year:
- Caliper
Most recent year:
- Crack
Most recent year:
- Hard Spot
Most recent year:
- Combination Tool
Most recent year:
- Transverse Field/Triaxial
Most recent year:
- Other
Most recent year:
Describe:
16. Has one or more hydrotest or other pressure test been conducted since
original construction at the point of the Accident?
If Yes -
Most recent year tested:
Testpressure:
17. Has one or more Direct Assessment been conducted on this segment?
- If Yes, and an investigative dig was conducted at the point of the Accident::
Most recent year conducted:
- If Yes, but the point of the Accident was not identified as a dig site:
Most recent year conducted:
18. Has one or more non-destructive examination been conducted at the
point of the Accident since January 1, 2002?
18a. If Yes, for each examination conducted since January 1, 2002, select type of non-destructive examination and indicate most
recent year the examination was conducted:
- Radiography
Most recent year conducted:
- Guided Wave Ultrasonic
Most recent year conducted:
- Handheld Ultrasonic Tool
Most recent year conducted:
- Wet Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Dry Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Other
Most recent year conducted:
Describe:
G2 - Natural Force Damage - only one sub -cause can be picked from shaded left-handed column
Natural Force Damage — Sub -Cause:
- If Earth Movement, NOT due to Heavy Rains/Floods:
1. Specify:
- If Other, Describe:
- If Heavy Rains/Floods:
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

2. Specify:
- If Other, Describe:
- If Lightning:
3. Specify:
- If Temperature:
4.Specify:
- If Other, Describe:
- If Other Natural Force Damage:
5. Describe:
Complete the following if any Natural Force Damage sub -cause is selected.
6. Were the natural forces causing the Accident generated in
conjunction with an extreme weather event?
6a. If Yes, specify: select all that apply)
- Hurricane
- Tropical Storm
- Tornado
- Other
- If Other, Describe:
G3 - Excavation Damage - only one sub -cause can be picked from shaded left-hand column
Excavation Damage — Sub -Cause:
- If Previous Damage due to Excavation Activity: Complete Questions 1-5 ONLY IF the 'Item Involved in Accident' (from PART
C, Question 3) is Pipe or Weld.
1. Has one or more internal inspection tool collected data at the point of
the Accident?
1 a. If Yes, for each tool used, select type of internal inspection tool and indicate most recent year run: -
- Magnetic Flux Leakage
Most recent year conducted:
- Ultrasonic
Most recent year conducted:
- Geometry
Most recent year conducted:
- Caliper
Most recent year conducted:
- Crack
Most recent year conducted:
- Hard Spot
Most recent year conducted:
- Combination Tool
Most recent year conducted:
- Transverse Field/Triaxial
Most recent year conducted:
- Other
Most recent year conducted:
Describe:
2. Do you have reason to believe that the internal inspection was
completed BEFORE the damage was sustained?
3. Has one or more hydrotest or other pressure test been conducted since
original construction at the point of the Accident?
- If Yes:
Most recent year tested:
Test pressure si
4. Has one or more Direct Assessment been conducted on the pipeline
segment?
- If Yes, and an investigative dig was conducted at the point of the Accident:
Most recent year conducted:
- If Yes, but the point of the Accident was not identified as a dig site:
Most recent year conducted:
5. Has one or more non-destructive examination been conducted at the
point of the Accident since January 1, 2002?
5a. If Yes, for each examination, conducted since January 1, 2002, select type of non-destructive examination and indicate most
recent year the examination was conducted:
- Radiography
Most recent year conducted:
- Guided Wave Ultrasonic
Most recent year conducted:
- Handheld Ultrasonic Tool
Most recent year conducted:
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

- Wet Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Dry Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Other
Most recent year conducted:
Describe:
Complete the following if Excavation Damage by Third Party is selected as the sub -cause.
6. Did the operator get prior notification of the excavation activity?
6a. If Yes, Notification received from: select all that apply) -
- One -Call System
- Excavator
- Contractor
-Landowner
Complete the following mandatory CGA-DIRT Program questions if any Excavation Damage sub -cause is selected.
7. Do you want PHMSA to upload the following information to CGA-
DIRT www.c a-dirt.com ?
8. Right -of -Way where event occurred: select all that apply) -
- Public
- If "Public", Specify:
- Private
- If "Private", Specify:
- Pipeline Property/Easement
- Power/Transmission Line
- Railroad
- Dedicated Public Utility Easement
- Federal Land
- Data not collected
- Unknown/Other
9. Type of excavator:
10. Type of excavation equipment:
11. Type of workperformed:
12. Was the One -Call Center notified?
12a. If Yes, specify ticket number:
12b. If this is a State where more than a single One -Call Center
exists, list the name of the One -Call Center notified:
13. Type of Locator:
14. Were facility locate marks visible in the area of excavation?
15. Were facilities marked correctly?
16. Did the damage cause an interruption in service?
16a. If Yes, specify duration of the interruption hours
17. Description of the CGA-DIRT Root Cause (select only the one predominant first level CGA-DIRT Root Cause and then, where
available as a choice, the one predominant second level CGA-DIRT Root Cause as well):
Root Cause:
- If One -Call Notification Practices Not Sufficient, specify:
- If Locating Practices Not Sufficient, specify:
- If Excavation Practices Not Sufficient, specify:
- If Other/None of the Above, explain:
G4 - Other Outside Force Damage - only one sub -cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column
Other Outside Force Damage — Sub -Cause:
- If Damage by Car, Truck, or Other Motorized Vehicle/Equipment NOT En a ed in Excavation:
1. Vehicle/Equipment operated by:
- If Damage by Boats, Barges, Drilling Rigs, or Other Maritime Equipment or Vessels Set Adrift or Which Have Otherwise Lost
Their Mooring:
2. Select one or more of the following IF an extreme weather event was a factor:
- Hurricane
- Tropical Storm
- Tornado
- Heavy Rains/Flood
- Other
- If Other, Describe:
- If Previous Mechanical Damage NOT Related to Excavation: Complete Questions 3-7 ONLY IF the "Item Involved in
Accident" from PART C, Question 3 is Pipe or Weld.
3. Has one or more internal inspection tool collected data at the point of
the Accident?
3a. If Yes, for each tool used, select type of internal inspection tool and indicate most recent year run:
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

- Magnetic Flux Leakage
Most recent year conducted:
- Ultrasonic
Most recent year conducted:
- Geometry
Most recent year conducted:
- Caliper
Most recent year conducted:
- Crack
Most recent year conducted:
- Hard Spot
Most recent year conducted:
- Combination Tool
Most recent year conducted:
- Transverse Field/Triaxial
Most recent year conducted:
- Other
Most recent year conducted:
Describe:
4. Do you have reason to believe that the internal inspection was
completed BEFORE the damage was sustained?
5. Has one or more hydrotest or other pressure test been conducted
since original construction at the point of the Accident?
- If Yes:
Most recent year tested:
Test pressure (psi :
6. Has one or more Direct Assessment been conducted on the pipeline
segment?
- If Yes, and an investigative dig was conducted at the point of the Accident:
Most recent year conducted:
- If Yes, but the point of the Accident was not identified as a dig site:
Most recent year conducted:
7. Has one or more non-destructive examination been conducted at the
point of the Accident since January 1, 2002?
7a. If Yes, for each examination conducted since January 1, 2002, select type of non-destructive examination and indicate most
recent year the examination was conducted:
- Radiography
Most recent year conducted:
- Guided Wave Ultrasonic
Most recent year conducted:
- Handheld Ultrasonic Tool
Most recent year conducted:
- Wet Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Dry Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Other
Most recent year conducted:
Describe:
- If Intentional Damage:
8. Specify:
- If Other, Describe:
- If Other Outside Force Damage:
9. Describe:
G5 - Material Failure of Pipe or Weld - only one sub -cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column
Use this section to report material failures ONLY IF the "Item Involved in Accident' (from PART C, Question 3) is "Pipe" or
"Weld."
Material Failure of Pipe or Weld — Sub -Cause:
1. The sub -cause shown above is based on the following: select all that apply)
- Field Examination
- Determined by Metallurgical Analysis
- Other Analysis
- If "Other Analysis", Describe:
- Sub -cause is Tentative or Suspected; Still Under Investigation
Supplemental Report required
- If Construction, Installation, or Fabrication -related:
2. List contributing factors: select all that apply)
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

- Fatigue or Vibration -related
Specify:
- If Other, Describe:
- Mechanical Stress:
- Other
- If Other, Describe:
- If Environmental Cracking -related:
3. Specify:
- If Other - Describe:
Complete the following if any Material Failure of Pipe or Weld sub -cause is selected.
4. Additional factors: select all that apply):
- Dent
- Gouge
- Pipe Bend
- Arc Burn
- Crack
- Lack of Fusion
- Lamination
- Buckle
- Wrinkle
- Misalignment
- Burnt Steel
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
5. Has one or more internal inspection tool collected data at the point of
the Accident?
5a. If Yes, for each tool used, select type of internal inspection tool and indicate most recent year run:
- Magnetic Flux Leakage
Most recent year run:
- Ultrasonic
Most recent year run:
- Geometry
Most recent year run:
- Caliper
Most recent year run:
- Crack
Most recent year run:
- Hard Spot
Most recent year run:
- Combination Tool
Most recent year run:
- Transverse Field/Triaxial
Most recent year run:
- Other
Most recent year run:
Describe:
6. Has one or more hydrotest or other pressure test been conducted since
original construction at the point of the Accident?
- If Yes:
Most recent year tested:
Test pressure si
7. Has one or more Direct Assessment been conducted on the pipeline
segment?
- If Yes, and an investigative dig was conducted at the point of the Accident -
Most recent year conducted:
- If Yes, but the point of the Accident was not identified as a dig site -
Most recent year conducted:
8. Has one or more non-destructive examination(s) been conducted at the
point of the Accident since January 1, 2002?
8a. If Yes, for each examination conducted since January 1, 2002, select type of non-destructive examination and indicate most
recent year the examination was conducted: -
- Radiography
Most recent year conducted:
- Guided Wave Ultrasonic
Most recent year conducted:
- Handheld Ultrasonic Tool
Most recent year conducted:
- Wet Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

- Dry Magnetic Particle Test
Most recent year conducted:
- Other
Most recent year conducted:
Describe:
G6 — Equipment Failure - only one sub -cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column
Equipment Failure — Sub -Cause:
- If Malfunction of Control/Relief Equipment:
1. Specify: select all that apply) -
- Control Valve
- Instrumentation
-SCADA
- Communications
- Block Valve
- Check Valve
- Relief Valve
- Power Failure
- Stopple/Control Fitting
- ESD System Failure
- Other
- If Other — Describe:
- If Pump or Pump -related Equipment:
2. Specify:
- If Other — Describe:
- If Threaded Connection/Coupling Failure:
3. Specify:
If Other — Describe:
- If Non -threaded Connection Failure:
4.Specify:
If Other — Describe:
- If Other Equipment Failure:
5. Describe:
Complete the following if any Equipment Failure sub -cause is selected.
6. Additional factors that contributed to the equipment failure: (select all that apply)
- Excessive vibration
- Overpressurization
- No support or loss of support
- Manufacturing defect
- Loss of electricity
- Improper installation
- Mismatched items (different manufacturer for tubing and tubing
fittings)
- Dissimilar metals
- Breakdown of soft goods due to compatibility issues with
transported commodity
- Valve vault or valve can contributed to the release
- Alarm/status failure
- Misalignment
- Thermal stress
- Other
If Other, Describe:
G7 - Incorrect Operation - only one sub -cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column
Incorrect Operation — Sub -Cause:
- If Tank, Vessel, or Sump/Separator Allowed or Caused to Overfill or Overflow
1. Specify:
- If Other, Describe:
- If Other Incorrect Operation
2. Describe:
Complete the following if any Incorrect Operation sub -cause is selected.
Form PHMSA F 7000.1

3. Was this Accident related to select all that apply): -
- Inadequate procedure
- No procedure established
- Failure to follow procedure
- Other:
- If Other, Describe:
4. What category type was the activity that caused the Accident?
5. Was the task(s) that led to the Accident identified as a covered task
in your Operator Qualification Program?
5a. If Yes, were the individuals performing the task(s) qualified for
the task(s)?
G8 - Other Accident Cause - only one sub -cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column
Other Accident Cause — Sub -Cause:
Unknown
- If Miscellaneous:
1. Describe:
- If Unknown:
2. Specify:
Still under investigation, cause of Accident to be
determined (*Supplemental Report required)
PART H - NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT
On 8/14/2020 at 18:20, a Colonial employee was notified by a local resident about a possible leak in Colonial's Right-of-way (ROW) approximately 100 feet
north (i.e., downstream) of Huntersville-Concord Road in Huntersville, NC. The possible leak location was discovered by utility vehicle riders that were on
a trail that crosses the pipeline ROW. The Colonial employee lives in the area and went to inspect the location. Upon inspection, the Colonial employee
confirmed a product release visible at the ground surface at 18:42 near mile marker 980 that was believed to be gasoline. The Colonial employee
contacted the Colonial Control Center in Alpharetta, GA to provide notification of the visible release and the Control Center initiated shutdown of Lines 1
and 2 at 18:43. The lines were blocked by closing valves upstream of the release location at Colonial's Charlotte Delivery facility (DF) and downstream of
the release location at the Kannapolis Station. The Colonial Operations Manager (OM) was notified at 18:44, and the Director of Operations (DO) was
notified at 19:00, followed by additional internal notifications that were made to mobilize resources to address the conditions discovered. At 19:42, a NRC
notification was made by the Control Center (Report number 1284598), the initial volume was reported at 75 barrels (bbls.), based on the limited
information Colonial had at the time. Notifications were also made to Mecklenburg County, US EPA, NCDEQ, and PHMSA. The NRC notification was
updated on 8/16/2020 at 17:40, with an estimated release volume of 1500 bbls. based on additional information available to Colonial as a result of the initial
response efforts.
Colonial issued an internal Tier 2 response notification at 19:32 to mobilize internal and contractor resources to the site, and established an Incident
Command Post to support the response. The leak source was identified on 8/15/2020 at approximately 12:00. Following confirmation of the leak source
being on Line 1, Line 2 was authorized to restart on 8/15/2020 at 0:05. The leak source was originating from beneath a prior repair (Type A sleeve) made in
2004 to address a pipeline anomaly identified through a previous integrity assessment. The leak was repaired by installing a Type B pressure containing
sleeve over the prior Type A sleeve repair. Line 1 was restarted on 8/19/2020 at approximately 21:00 after repair were completed.
The continued recovery of product and completion of the site characterization will have oversight by the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) and Mecklenburg County.
Updated on 9/14/2020 to correct error in cost estimate.
PART I - PREPARER AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
Pre arer's Name
Denise Langley
Pre arer's Title
Compliance Coordinator
Pre arer's Telephone Number
770.819.3574
Pre arer's E-mail Address
[e-mail]
Pre arer's Facsimile Number
Authorized Signer Name
Mark Piazza
Authorized Signer Title
Manager Pipeline Compliance
Authorized Signer Telephone Number
678.763.5911
Authorized Signer Email
[e-mail]
Date
09/14/2020
Form PHMSA F 7000.1