ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL MEGAN NEAL, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL LEGAL ENFORCEMENTSECTION CHRISTI CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN RYAN SITTON, COMMISSIONER WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL March 16, 2018 Ronald R. Del Vento Asst. Attorney General Bankruptcy Collections Division Of?ce of the Attorney General PO. Box 12548 Austin, Tx 78711-2548 Dear Mr. Del Vento: Enclosed please ?nd documents which were ?led in the following referenced case: Company Name: Metro Bore Address Information: 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Tx 75116 Case Type: PEN Total Amount: 78,000.00 Damage Prevention Docket No. and Location Information: Docket Nos.: 44848 Location: 112 Arabian Rd., (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas Sincerely, grief/Meg Terrence Frischen Attorney General Liaison General Counsel Legal Enforcement Section 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE ir POST OFFICE Box 12967 Ausnn, Texas 78711-2967 PHONE: 511463-6762 FAX: 513463-6684 TDD saunas-2939 on TDY 51214634284 AN EOESAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CHRISTI CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCII, GENERAL COUNSEL RYAN COMMISSIONER MEGAN NEAL, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL WAYNE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT SECTION RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL MEMORANDUM TO: Jamie Renard, Damage Prevention Manager FROM: Hailey A. Wolf, Staff Attorney, Office of General Counsel- Enforcement DATE: January 10, 2018 RE: DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF COMMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AS FULLY STATE IN INCORPORATED COMPLAINTS ENCLOSED. Commission Enforcement action on the above- referenced docket has been ?nalized for the following reason(s): Final Orjder was signed on December 5, 2017 and the total amount of penalties assessed was $78,000.00 The captioned docket will be referred to the Attorney General for enforcement and collection action. Please ensure that copies of any additional information relating to the compliance status of the above-mentioned dockets is sent to Becky Tate, Enforcement, for inclusion in the docket ?le. cc: ?le CHRISTI CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN RANDALL D. COLLINS, DIRECTOR RYAN COMMISSIONER WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION December 6, 2017 Re: Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848: Enforcement action against Metro Bore for violations of Commission rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Final Order TO the Parties: The Railroad Commission of Texas has acted upon the above-referenced case. Please refer to the attached Final Order for the terms and date of such action. The Final Order will not be ?nal and effective until at least 25 days after the Commission's order is signed. If a Motion for Rehearing is timely ?led, the Final Order will not be ?nal and effective until such Motion is overruled. A Motion for Rehearing should state the reasons you believe a rehearing should be granted, including any errors that you believe exist in the Commission's Final Order. If the Motion is granted, the Final Order will be set aside and the case will be subject to further action by the Commission at that time or at a later date. To be timely. a Motion for Rehearing must be received by the Commission's Docket Services (see letterhead address) no later than 5:00 pm. on the 25th day after the date the decision or order that is the subject of the motion was signed. Fax or Elan transmissions will not be accepted without grior approval from the Agminisrtrative l_.aw Judge ORIGINAL PLUS TEN copies of the Motion for Rehearing shall be submitted to the ALJ. PLEASE DO NOT STAPLE COPIES. In addition. if practical, parties are requested to provide the ALJ with a copy of the Motion for Rehearing in digital format. The digital format should be labeled with the docket number, the title of the document, and the format of the document. Every pleading, plea, motion, or request ?led with the Hearings Division must be served on all other parties in person. by mail or courier, by fax. by e-mail with consent from the ALJ or the Hearings Division Director, or in another manner directed by the ALJ or the Hearings Division Director. Proof of such service must be evidenced by a certi?cate of service signed by a party or the party's attorney of record, or signed and verified if the service is made by any other person, and attached to the document ?led with the Hearings Division. Every pleading, plea, motion. or request ?led with the Hearings Division shall conform to the requirements of 16 Tex. Admin. Code 1.32. A pleading, plea, motion, or request ?led with the Hearings Division which does not conform to the requirements set forth herein will not be accepted for ?ling by the Hearings Division. Contact for Additional Information - In accordance with Tex. Gov't Code 2001.061 and 16 Tex. Admin. Code 1.7, ex parte communications with the Administrative Law Judges. Examiners, and Commissioners are prohibited. Any persons or entities desiring additional information may contact the Commission by writing to the Director. Hearings Division, Railroad Commission of Texas. 1701 North Congress Avenue. P. 0. Box 12967, Capitol Station. Austin, Texas 7871 1-2967. Any persons or entities having clerical questions. such as questions regarding the number of copies of ?lings, the service list or reviewing the record. may contact Joseph N. Menefe at (512) 463-9298. cc: Service List I701 NORTH CONGRESS ENIJE POST OFFICE Box 1296? it ALSTIN, Tex-ts 78711-296? PHONE: 5l21463-6924 F.va 5l27463-6989 TDD 80077354989 OR TDY Sly-3634284 Ax EO rm. ER Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848: Enforcement action against Metro Bore for violations of Commission rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas Via First-Class Mail: METRO BORE 102 E. FAIRMEADOWS DR. TEXAS 75116 Via Email: Hailey A. Wolf, RRC, Austin Becky Tate, RRC. Austin Santos Gonzales, RRC, Austin Joseph Menefe. Hearings Division Railroad Commission of Texas 16 TEX. CODE ?1.7 (Ex Parte Communications) (3) Ex parte communications are prohibited in contested cases as provided in the APA and other applicable rules including the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Each party shall provide all other parties with a copy of all documents submitted to an examiner. (1) The attachment of a certi?cate of service stating that a document was served on a party creates a rebuttable presumption that the named party was provided a copy. (2) Failure to provide a copy to all other parties may result in rejection and return of the document without consideration. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS SECTION DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848 ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF COMMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED) WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS FINAL ORDER The Railroad Commission of Texas ("Commission") ?nds that after statutory notice the captioned proceeding was heard by a Commission Administrative Law Judge on September 28, 2017 and that the respondent, Metro Bore ("Respondent"), failed to appear or respond to the Notice of Hearing. Pursuant to 1.25 of the Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure ex. R. R. Comm'n, 16 Tex. Admin. Code 1.25] and after being duly submitted to the Commission at conference held in its of?ces in Austin, Texas, the Commission makes the following ?ndings of fact and conclusions of law. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Pursuant to the Railroad Commission's General Rule of Practice and Procedure 1.45(c) R.R. Comm'n, 16 Tex. Admin. Code 1 the Commission may serve documents by mail or by personal delivery.1 Metro Bore was given Notice of Hearing, along with the Second Amended Original Complaint via personal delivery by process server, Texas Legal Connection. Per a telephone conversation between Metro Bore and Texas Legal Connection the personal service delivery took place at the agreed upon location of 534 Holly Lane, Duncanville, Texas 75116. 2. Electronic proof of personal service was provided to the Commission by Texas Legal Connection indicating the Second Original Complaint and Notice of Hearing was served on July 27. 2017 to Metro Bore at 534 Holly Lane, Duncanville, Texas 75116. The scanned image of the signature of the process server certifying delivery has been on ?le for more than 15 days. 3. Respondent is the person, as that term is de?ned by 16 Tex. Admin. Code responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable. toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 Tex. Admin. Code 18.1 at the captioned location. 4. The Enforcement Section appeared at the hearing in this matter and its certi?ed ?le was accepted into evidence. Respondent failed to respond to the Original Complaint and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing to appear at the hearing. 5. Respondent's excavation activities at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas, on September 21, 2015, caused damage to an I As amended on August 21, 2017 ?'om 16 Tex. Admin. Code ?l.48 to 16 Tex. Admin. Code {$1.45 Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848 Final Order Page 2 intrastate underground pipeline, damage incident number 104300. Respondent failed to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) (Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 Tex. Admin. Code by failing to give the noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 Tex. Admin. Code Respondent's excavation activities at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas, on September 21, 2015, caused damage to an intrastate underground pipeline, damage incident number 104300. Respondent failed to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) (Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 Tex. Admin. Code by failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission through the TDRF within 10 days of the damage incident as required by 16 Tex. Admin. Code Respondent has no history of previous violations. Respondent's violation is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety. Respondent has not demonstrated good faith in that Respondent committed the described violation and did not appear at the hearing to explain its conduct. The administrative penalty assessed in this ?nal order conforms to the penalty guidelines in 16 Tex. Admin. Code ?18.12. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Proper notice was issued to all persons legally entitled to notice. The Commission has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties pursuant to Texas Utilities Code 121.201, Texas Natural Resources Code 117.011-117.012, and/or Texas Health Safety Code 756.126. Respondent violated 16 Tex. Admin. Code 18.4(e) and 11(b). ORDERING PROVISIONS IT IS ORDERED THAT within 30 days from the day immediately following the date this order becomes ?nal: 1. Metro Bore shall bring damage incident number 104300 into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention 11(b), and any other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules and applicable statutes. Metro Bore shall pay the Railroad Commission of Texas, for disposition as provided by law, an administrative penalty in the amount of $78,000.00 (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of Rule 4(e) at $1 ,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries for a total of $50,000.00, plus $25,000.00 for the impact to the residential and public area for a total enhancement amount of Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848 Final Order Page 3 It is further ORDERED by the Commission that this order shall not be ?nal and effective until 25 days after a party is noti?ed of the Commission's order. A party is presumed to have been noti?ed of the Commission's order three days after the date of the notice is actually mailed. If a timely motion for rehearing of an application is ?led by any party at interest, this order shall not become ?nal and effective until such motion is overruled, or if such motion is granted, this order shall be subject to further action by the Commission. Pursuant to Tex. Gov't Code the time allotted for Commission action on a motion for rehearing in this case prior to its being overruled by operation of law is hereby extended until 90 days from the date the parties are noti?ed of this order in accordance with Tex. Gov't Code 2001.144. All requested ?ndings of fact and conclusions of law which are not expressly adopted herein are denied. All pending motions and requests for relief not previously granted or granted herein are denied. Noncompliance with the provisions of this order is subject to enforcement by the Attorney General and subject to civil penalties up to $10,000 per day per violation. Done this 5?1 day of December 2017. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS (Signatures af?xed by Default Master Order dated December 5. 2017) RML/jnm ROAD COMMISSION OF TEX HEARINGS DIVISION ENFORCEMENT MASTER DEFAULT ORDER December 5, 2017 At a public conference held at its of?ces in Austin. Texas, the Commission finds that after statutory notice. the following enforcement proceedings were heard by the examiners, and that the Respondents failed to appear. The Final Orders prepared for the following dockets are incorporated by reference into this order, and by approval of this Master Order. the Commission approves the referenced Final Orders and ado contained therein. the ?ndings of fact and conclusions of law ITEM DOCKET OPERATOR LEASE, WELL, OR SITE ORDER TERMS 0. N0. - 99. 7C-0305639 Low-End Oil LLC Johnson, J. Willis (Gas ID No. 216776) 16 TAC Pay administrative (Operator No. Lease, penalty of $23,635.00 510360) Well No. 1, 3.17(a) Veribest (Harkey) Field, and 3.21(i) Tom Green County; and Textron-Johnson (16204) Lease, Well No. 3. Harriett (Palo Pinto) Field. Tom Green County 100. 76-0305456 Sundance Andrews. Frank (15659) Lease. 16 TAC Pay administrative (Complaint Consulting Corp. Well Nos10. 11, 13, 15, penalty of $177,349.00 No. 1114) (Operator No. 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 24, 26. 27, 28, 31, 32. 33. 629459) 34, 35, 36. 37, 36, 41, 42. 43, 44. 45, 46, 47, and 49. 3.22(b) Shackelford County Regular Field. and Shackellord County. Texas 101. 76-0305456 Sundance Andrews, Frank (20066) Lease, 16 TAC Pay administrative (Complaint Consulting Corp. the Andrews, Frank (21606) Lease. penalty of $26,572.00 Nos. 1115, (Operator No. Well Nos. 1, 3. and 56, and 1116. 1117) 629459) the Andrews (31635) Lease. and Well Nos. 26 and 68, Shackelford County Regular Field. Shackeliord County. Texas 102. 09-0305238 Quest-Tex Dale (RRC ID 215335), 16 TAC Pay administrative Energy OP ll, Well No 81. penalty of $15,369.00 LLC (Operator JMG MAG (Miss) Field, and No. 664645) Parker County, Texas 103. 78-0305664 Henry F. Shrum, Fambro-Vick (RRC lD 056605) 16 TAC Pay administrative (rmli'jm) Owner/Sole Well No. 1, and penalty of $11,150.00 Proprietor, SBS Stephens County Regular (Gas) Field. and Oil Company the Fambro-Vick (RRC 10 252147) (Operator No. Well No. 2, 749670) Stephens County Regular Field. Stephens County Texas 104. 10-0305893 North Texas State of Texas -AD- (08453) Lease, 16 TAC Pay administrative (rml/jm) Llano Operating Well Nos. 63. 67. 66. 69, 73, 75, 76, 77. 76. penalty of $69,360.00 Corp (Operator 69. 90, 91, 92, and 93. No. 614199) Panhandle Hutchinson County Field. and Hutchinson County. Texas 336(3) 105- 09-0297659 Operating. Waggoner -A- (05143) Lease. 16 TAC Pay penalty of (ojh/dac) LLC (630625) Well Nos. 1. 3, and 4. $16,421.00 and Wichita County Regular Field. reimburse for State- Wichita County. Texas and managed funds of 56,670.00 Enforcement Master fr"?ult Order December 5, 2017 Page 2 ITEM DOCKET OPERATOR LEASE. WELL. OR SITE ORDER TERMS NO. NO. 105. 09-0299682 Walden, Richard Samples. Reno (22510) Lease. 16 TAC Place the lease into (cjh/dac) 8 Sandra Well No. 2. compliance and pay (891770) Wichita County Regular Field. and penalty of $8,350.00 Wichita County. Texas 3.21(j) 107. 03-0306151 Denver Energy Julie (24590) Lease. 16 TAC Place the lease into Exploration. LLC Well No. 4. and compliance and pay (216456) Brookshire Field. penalty of $2,006.00 Waller County. Texas 108. 03-0306147 Denver Energy KoomeylMorrison Lease. 16 TAC 3.16(b) Place the lease into Exploration. LLC Well No. 3 (Drilling Permit No. 702929). compliance and pay (216456) Brookshire Field. penalty of $5,500.00 Waller County. Texas 109. 6E-0298706 Graystone Alford (07210) Lease. 16 TAC Place the lease into (cjh/dac) Energy Well Nos. 2. and 3. compliance and pay Corporation East Texas Field. penalty ofS21.800.00 (328347) Rusk County. Texas and 110. 06-0298128 Graystone Allen. Jeannie (14573) Lease. 16 TAC Place the lease into (cjh/dac) Energy Well No. 1. compliance and pay Corporation Minden (Travis Peak Cons.) Field. and penalty of 518.380.00 (328347) Rusk County. Texas 111. 09-0305066 Colotex District Complaint No. 500 16 TAC Place the lease into (cjh/dac) Operating. LLC West Vogtsberger Unit (13357) Lease. Well compliance and pay (168908) Nos. 2.3.4.8. 10. 11. 12. 14. and 16. and penalty of $71,079.00 Archer County Regular Field. Archer County. Texas 112. 09-0305065 Colotex District Complaint No. 480 16 TAC Place the lease into (cjh/dac) Operating. LLC East Vogtsberger Unit (13356) Lease. compliance and pay (168908) Well Nosand penalty of 551.909.00 Archer County Regular Field. Archer County. Texas 113. 03-0305666 RHC Energy Kenley Lease. 16 TAC Place in compliance (jnc/mf) (USA) LLC Well No. 1H (Gas ID No. 253375). and pay administrative (Operator No. Apple Springs (Glen Rose) Field. penalty of 310.952.00 704798) Trinity County. Texas 114. 04-0279541 Jubilee Cooke. C. N. (01588) Lease. 16 TAC Place in compliance (jnc/mf) Resources. Ltd. Well Nos. 1 and 4. and pay administrative (448086) London Gin Field. and penalty of $19,078.00 Nueces County. Texas 320(3) 115. 04-0286046 Jubilee London. Dorothy (12286) Lease. 16 TAC Place in compliance (inc/mi) Resources. Ltd. Well No. 5. and and pay administrative (448086) Doughty (Frio 6735) Field. penalty of 59.900.00 Nueces County. Texas 116. 04-0286055 Jubilee London. D. E. Lease. 16 TAC Place in compliance (inclme Resources. Ltd. Well No. 3 (Gas ID No. 110944). and and pay administrative (448086) Doughty (Frio 7060) Field. penalty of 51 1,100.00 Nueces County. Texas 117. 10-0305780 Casa Operations Whittenburg -A- (02333) Lease. 16 TAC Place in compliance (138882) Well Nos. 1 and 2. and pay administrative Panhandle Hutchinson County Field. Hutchinson County. Texas penalty of 310.000.00 Enforcement Master Default Order December 5, 2017 Page 3 ITEM DOCKET OPERATOR LEASE, WELL, OR SITE ORDER TERMS NO. NO. 118. DP 44848 Metro Bore 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) 16 TAC Pay administrative Waxahachie, and 18.11(b) penalty of $78,000.00 Ellis County, Texas 119. DP 14365 Laughley Bridge 1715 Gould Ave, 16 TAC Place damage incident (cjh/dac) 8 Construction. Fort Worth, into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County, Texas pay penalty of $3,000.00 110. DP 14381 Laughley Bridge I 4004 Scenery Hill Ct. (Scenery Hill). 18 TAC 18.3(a) Place damage incident (cjh/dac) 8 Construction. Fort Worth. and 1811(1)). into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County. Texas pay penalty of $6,000.00 121. DP 18054 Laughley Bridge 1701 Scenery Hill Rd. (Oak Cliff). Fort 16 TAC 1811(6). Place damage incident 8 Construction, Worth, Tarrant County. Texas into compliance and Inc. pay penalty of $3,000.00 122. DP 18481 Laughley Bridge 101 Stagecoach Trl. (Ranch House Rd). 16 TAC Place damage incident 8 Construction. Willow Park. into compliance and Inc. Parker County, Texas pay penalty of 63.000.00 123. DP 18515 Laughley Bridge 3140 Mims St. 16 TAC Place damage incident (cjhl?dac) 8 Construction. Ft. Worth. into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County. Texas. pay penalty of 33.000.00 124. DP 18530 Laughley Bridge 3101 Mims St. (Church). 16 TAC 18.11(b) Place damage incident (cjhidac) 8 Construction. Ft. Worth. into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County. Texas pay penalty of 83.000.00 125. DP 18540 Laughley Bridge 3163 Mims St. (E. Lancaster). 16 Place damage incident 8 Construction. Ft. Worth. into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County. Texas pay penalty of $3,000.00 12$. DP 20621 Laughley Bridge 3120 Mims St. (Ruth 16 TAC 18.11(b) Place damage incident 8 Construction. Ft. Worth. into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County. Texas pay penalty of $3,000.00 127. DP 21347 Laughley Bridge 6913 Camp Bowie Blvd. (Marks PL). 16 TAC 18.10(a) Place damage incident (cjh/dac) 8 Construction. Ft. Worth, and into compliance and Inc. Tarrant County. Texas pay penalty of $6,000.00 12!. DP 2277? Laughley Bridge 4600 Geddes Ave. (Hulen 16 TAC 1811(1)) Place damage incident 8 Ft. Worth, into compliance and lnc. Tarrant County, Texas pay penalty of $3,000.00 125. DP 24469 Laughley Bridge 518 Oakdale 81., Irving. 16 TAC 18.4(b) Place damage incident 8 Construction. Dallas County. Texas. and into compliance and Inc. pay penalty of $6000.00 130- DP 24874 Laughley Bridge 440 E. Oakdale Rd. (Bolden Rd). 16 TAC 18.11(b) Place damage incident (cjh/dac) 8 Construction. trying, into compliance and Inc. Dallas County. Texas pay penalty of 83.000.00 Enforcement Master e?eult Order December 5, 2017 Page 4 ITEM DOCKET OPERATOR LEASE. WELL, OR SITE VIOLATIONS) ORDER TERMS NO. NO. 131. DP 30718 Laughley Bridge 919 Travis Ave. (W. Terrell). 16 TAC 18.3(e) Place damage incident (cjh/dac) 8. Construction. Fort Worth. and 18.1 1 into compliance and inc. Tarrant County. Texas pay penalty of 39.000.00 132. DP 24239 Cross Utilities. 700 US 81 S. 16 TAC Place damage incident LLC Decatur. and 18.11(b) into compliance and Wise County. Texas administrative penalty of $1 100.00. less $400.00 131. DP 35858 Cross Utilities. 4221 Dobbs SL. 16 TAC ?18.11(b) Place damage incident (rml/jm) LLC Corinth. into compliance and Denton County. Texas administrative penalty of 52.500.00. less $900.00 previously paid 134. DP 39322 Cross Utilities. 1450 Simmons (Sentinel Oaks 16 TAC ?18.11(b) Place damage incident LLC Spring. into compliance and Denton County. Texas administrative penalty of 52.000.00. less $900.00 previously paid 135. DP 44237 Cross Utilities. 240 Meadowlark Ln. (Redbird 16 TAC ?18.11(b) Place damage incident (rml/jm) LLC Highland Village. into compliance and Denton County. Texas administrative penalty of $3500.00 136. DP 45446 Cross Utilities. 14160 Rawhide Pkwy. 16 TAC ?18.1 1 Place damage incident (rmi/jm) LLC Farmers Branch. into compliance and Dallas County. Texas administrative penalty of $2000.00 13?. DP 45570 Cross Utilities, 2456 Mare Road. 16 TAC ?18.11(b) Bring damage incident (rmli'jm) LLC Carrollton. number 108147 into Denton County. Texas compliance; pay administrative penalty of $1000.00 13-5. DP 46203 Cross Utilities. 8845 Laurel Ln., 16 TAC Place damage incident LLC Southlake. and 18.11(b) into compliance and Tarrant County. Texas administrative penalty of $2000.00 13!. DP 46419 Cross Utilities. 1029 Modesoto Ct. (Cordero). 16 TAC Place damage incident (rmlijm) LLC Lewisville. and 18.1103) into compliance and Denton County. Texas administrative penalty of $6500.00 140. DP 46734 Cross Utilities. 1818 Kaiser Cv.. 16 TAC Place damage incident (rmlijm) LLC Northlake. and 18.11(b) into compliance and Denton County. Texas administrative penalty of $4500.00 1141. DP 47516 Cross Utilities. 555 Waterloo. 16 TAC ?18.1 1 Place damage incident LLC Lewisville. into compliance and Denton County. Texas administrative penalty of $3000.00 142. DP 43177 Cross Utilities. 4232 Sumayyah Dr. (Hanaa CL). 16 TAC Place damage incident (rmlijm) LLC Irving and 1811(6) into compliance and Dallas County. Texas administrative penalty of $3500.00 Enforcement Master Df'ault Order December 5, 2017 Dallas County, Texas Page 5 ITEM DOCKET OPERATOR LEASE, WELL, OR SITE ORDER TERMS NO. NO. 143. DP 48267 Cross Utilities. 4017 W. Airport Fwy. (Cheyyenne). 16 TAC Place damage incident LLC Irving, and 18.1103) into compliance and administrative penalty of $2000.00 Enforcement Master Default Order December 5, 2017 Page 6 IT IS ORDERED that each referenced Final Order shall become effective when this Enforcement Master Default Order is signed and that a cepy of this Order shall be af?xed to each Final Order. Done in Austin, Texas on December 5, 2017. ATTEST: a. - <35RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS u. CHAIRMAN CHRISTI CRADDICK E, COMMISWER RYA M72) WAYNE CHRISTIAN CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL RYAN COMMISSIONER DAVID W. COONEY, .IR., DIRECTOR WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER ENFORCEMENT SECTION RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL July 19, 2017 Metro Bore 102 E. Fairrneadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS NOTICE OF HEARING On September 28, 2017, a hearing will be held at 9:00 am in the William B. Travis Building, 1701 North Congress, Austin, Texas to determine whether Abry Brothers (Houston), LLC ("Respondent") has violated provisions of the Railroad Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as alleged more fully in the attached Original Complaint, which is hereby incorporated by reference. This hearing will be held under the jurisdiction and authority of: Chapter 2001 of the Texas Government Code; Section 121.201 of Chapter 121 of the Texas Utilities Code; Sections 117.011-117.012 of Chapter 117 of the Texas Natural Resources Code; and Section 756.126 of Chapter 756 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. For room assignment, please check the bulletin board in the ?rst ?oor lobby on the morning of the hearing. IF ANY PARTY DESIRES A WRITTEN TRANSCRIPT of the hearing, that party should notify the Docket Services of?ce at (512) 463-6848, at least ?ve (5) working days in advance of the hearing date. If a written transcript is requested, the commission may assess the cost of the transcript to one or more parties. Unless any party requests a written transcript, the record will be made by audio tape recording. ANY PARTY MAY REQUEST A TELEPHONIC PROCEEDING. Section 1.130 of the Railroad Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.130], provides requests for telephonic proceedings must be in writing, include all pertinent telephone number(s), require the consent of all parties and be made more than twenty(20) days prior to the proceeding. You may contact the undersigned attorney forfu rther explanation. ANY INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY who needs auxiliary aids or services in order to have an equal opportunity to effectively communicate and participate in this hearing must request such aids or services AT LEAST TWO WEEKS prior to the hearing date by notifying the Personnel Of?ce of the Railroad 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE Box 12967 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2967 PHONE: 512/463-6762 FAX: 51274636989 TDD 800-735-2939 OR TDY 512-463-7234 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Notice of Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 Commission at PO. Box 12967, Austin TX 78711-2967, by phone at (512) 463-7327, or by TDD at 1 -800-735-2989. Metro Bore is directed to appear at this hearing. Requests for continuance are governed by Section 1.124 of the Railroad Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.124]. Grant of a continuance may be conditioned on your agreement to appear at a de?nite later date. IF YOU DECIDE TO REQUESTA CONTINUANCE, AWRITTEN MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE MUST BE RECEIVED IN DOCKET SERVICES NOT LESS THAN FIVE (5) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE. DOCKET SERVICES WILL THEN FORWARD THE MOTION TO THE ASSIGNED EXAMINER. ONLY THE EXAMINER MAY GRANT A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE. A COPY OF THE MOTION MUST ALSO BE SERVED AT THE SAME TIME ON THE UNDERSIGNED ATTORNEY. The motion must: 1) set forth speci?c grounds for which the continuance is sought; 2) make reference to all similar motions ?led in the proceeding; and 3) state whether all parties (including the undersigned Enforcement attorney) agree with the motion for continuance. To determine Enforcement's position regarding such a motion, you may contact the undersigned at (512) 463-2088. The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and inspection reports which will be offered into evidence in this case. The ?le is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inspection or copying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858 to discuss the matter. Under Section 81.0531, Texas Natural Resources Code, the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000.00 per day per violation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs, and attomeys' fees being adjudged against you. OFFER OF SETTLEMENT If you agree to settle this matter forthe violations set forth in the Second Amended Original Complaint, which including the ?ling the damage report and payment of an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by August 29, 2017, I will recommend the Commission settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our of?ce by contacting me at the number below my signature. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it, reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. Notice of Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 3 IF YOU DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE OR APPEAR AT THE SCHEDULED HEARING IN A MANNER DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, STAFF WILL REQUEST THAT A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU. ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU APPEAR WITHOUT HAVING FILED A NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR, THE STAFF WILL REQUEST THAT THE HEARING BE POSTPONED TO A DATE AND TIME TO BE DETERMINED BY THE EXAMINER. Sincerely, Hailey A. WolI, Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION 4g, UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 -. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, .9 5? SECOND AMENDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT 0" Comes now the Railroad Commission Of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this Second Amended Original Complaint Charging Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with violations Of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) and Rule 11(b) at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION 1. The Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent under TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?121.201, TEX. NAT. RESOURCES CODE ?117.011-117.012 and TEX. HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ?756.126(g) which establishes the Railroad Commission Of Texas authority relating to the prevention of damage to pipeline facilities resulting from the movement Of earth by a person in the vicinity Of the facility. Pursuant to the Railroad Commission's General Rule Of Practice and Procedure ?1.48(g) fl'ex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE the Commission Shall serve documents by mail or by personal delivery. This second amended original complaint and notice Of hearing and settlement Offer is being served via personal delivery by a process server. at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr.. Duncanville, Texas 75116, the "Excavator address" reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form filed on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent tO a One- Call Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8. 2015, ticket number 1575144185. The Commission contends that the service on the address constitutes suf?cient notice to establish the Commissions personal jurisdiction over Respondent. Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 2. Respondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1(a) at the captioned location. The Respondent is a "person" as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid-Texas Div. ("Operator") designated Respondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commission a TDRF report on November 11, 2015, for the subject incident. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(e) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) flex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an "all clear" or ?no conflict? response from an operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation and has received an "all clear or "no con?ict" response from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. Respondent became aware of and had knowledge of the erroneous positive response because while excavating Respondent observed that the pipeline continued past the markings. Respondent was aware of unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation after receiving an ?all clear or ?no con?ict? response and continued excavation. The Respondent stated, during his deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigation (See ?le for copy of the deposition pages 19-22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 Investigations) that he knew the markings were inaccurate yet continued to excavate. Respondent indicated that the markings from the ?rst notice, or response, stopped at the curb yet the pipeline continued past the markings onto the sidewalk. Once Respondent became aware of the unmarked pipeline Respondent continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center as required. (See pages 19-22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent's violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of property; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) fl'ex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1 requires each excavatorthat damages an underground pipeline to notify the operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b), must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days of the incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference No. 159606 for the subject damage incident. Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 4 2.2. On October 13, 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst class mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 forthe subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by ?rst class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingent upon Respondent?s compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); speci?cally, submission of Respondent?s Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that, as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Commission could impede goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing Respondent an administrative penalty of $78,000.00 (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(e) at $1 ,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries for a total of $50,000.00, plus $25,000.00 for the impact to the residential and public area for a total enhancement amount of or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing Respondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and 3. ordering any other relief to which, under the pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. Respectfully submitted, 0344?- Hailey A. wolf, Staff Attorney 9 Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463-2088 FAX No. (512) 463-7001 P. O. Box 12967 Austin. Texas 7871 1-2967 Dated: July 19, 2017 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day July 19, 2017 have provided a copy of this Notice of Hearing, together with a copy of the Second Amended Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848,to Texas Legal Connection, be served personally on Metro Bore. Effective date of service will be the date upon which citation of service is signed, properly addressed as below: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 JJDW fl). Flaii?y A. Wolf, Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 cc: Damage Prevention Section-Austin RETURN OF SERVICE RAILROAD COMNIISSION OF TEXAS DANIAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCENIENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A CONIMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS The attached Notice of Hearing, Second Amended Original Complaint, and Certi?cate of Service in the above referenced docket has been served in person on Metro Bore, by delivery to Metro Bore at the request of the Respondent, by telephone conversation, the Respondent was served at 534 Holly Ln. Duneanville, Texas 75116 on 7/27/2017 at 11:02 AM, and leaving said instrument with Rigo Yanez Owner of Metro Bore. Executed in Dallas, State of Texas, on the 2 day of July .2017 . STEVEN LTRENI [Name of person who served instrument] PROCESS SERVER {Title of person who served instrument] SCH 9 1 2 {process server Identi?cation Number] 4f3 0/201 9 [Expiration date ofcert?icatt?on] On September 28, 2017, a hearing will be held at 9:00 am in the William B. Travis Building, 1701 North Congress, Austin, Texas. This hearing will be held under the urisdiction and authority of: Chapter 2001 of the Texas Government Code; Section 121.201 of Chapter 121 of the Texas Utilities Code; Sections 1 11011?111012 of Chapter 117 of the Texas Natural Resources Code; and Section 756.126 of Chapter 756 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. For room assigrunent, please check the bulletin board in the ?rst floor lobby on the morning of the hearing. SIGNATURE OF PERSON SERVING CONIPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING My name is StevenJTreni and my address is P0 30.178018! 1 and USA . I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Dallas County, Texas, on the day of July, 2017. SW Signature David Porter, CHAIRMAN Kari French Christi Craddick. COMMISSIONER DIRECTOR Ryan Sitton, COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION 455_23 October 13. 2015 METRO BORE All docurgm submitted to the ATTN: RIGO YANEZ 102 FAIRMEADOW DR ?"19 "1?5 "cl" 9 DUNCANVILLE. TX 751 16-271 1 RE: Request to Excavator for Texas Damage Reporting Form (TDRF) A pipeline operator has ?led a TDRF for the incidentIs) listed below with the Railroad Commission of Texas concerning damage to its underground pipeline. The pipeline operator has named you or your company as the responsible party for this damage. By rule. you must submit a TDRF online within 10 days from the date the incident occurred. If you have not submitted your TDRF. please see the attached instruction guidelines for help with submitting your TDRF immediately. Failure to submit your TDRF could result in penalties. Baum Incident Incident Reference ELLIS WAXAHACHIE 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED) 09:2112015 104300 1596594 ATMOS ENERGY CORP.. MID-TEX DIV. I Document Key: I The Railroad Commission of Texas has jurisdiction over the Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules under Texas Administrative Code Title 16, Chapter 18. These rules, effective September 1, 2007, apply to pipeline operators and persons engaged in or preparing to engage in excavation activities in the vicinity of an underground pipeline. If you have any questions, please contact the Pipeline Damage Prevention Program at 512-475-0512. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 12967 AUSTIN, TX 78711-2967 5I2-475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-135-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 Kari French David Porter. CHAIRMAN DIRECTOR Christi Craddick. COMMISSIONER Ryan Sitton. COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION 455-23 January 11,2016 METRO BORE ATTN: RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ 102 FAIRMEADOW DR DUNCANVILLE, TX 751 16-271 1 Re: Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848: Violation of Commission Rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, 16 T.A.C. and and 18.1l(b) at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas on September 21, 2015. Dear RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ: This letter is to advise you that records submitted to the Commission indicate that METRO BORE was in violation of the requirements of Commission Rule 16 T.A.C. and and and indicate that METRO BORE was responsible for the subject violations. Speci?cally, METRO BORE violated Commission Rule 16 TAC Sections: 18AM) - Excavator did not make a visual check for any unmarked underground pipelines. 18,4(e) - The Excavator was not sure the area of excavation was clear and failed to give the Noti?cation Center a second notice prior to excavation activities. 18.11im - The Excavator did not submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission within 10 days of the incident. Due to the serious nature of these violations, this matter could be referred to the Commission's Enforcement Section for immediate enforcement action. However, this letter is being sent to you as an offer to settle if METRO BORE will agree to pay a reduced administrative penalty to the Commission for the cited violations. Any settlement will be contingent on: 1) any required compliance and the violations resolved; speci?cally, a Texas Damage Reporting Form (TDRF) must be ?led online for Report Reference Number 159669-1, using Document Key a copy of the report must be mailed to the Commission along with the signed Stipulation, Agreed Settlement and Consent Order, and 2) the payment of an administrative penalty to the Commission and such penalty amount being approved by the Commissioners, and 3) the return of the enclosed Agreed Order with your original signature. Penalty guidelines, found in 16 TAC ?18. 12, for these very serious violations support the staff-recommended penalty of $4,000.00, plus an enhancement in the amount of $75,000.00 for a total of $79,000.00. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 12967 AUSTIN. TX 78711-2967 0 (512) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 However, the standard procedure of the Oversight Safety Division in these circumstances is to offer to settle this docket for a lesser penalty of $77,000.00. If you wish to settle this matter with an Agreed Order, please sign and return the attached Stipulation, Agreed Settlement, and Consent Order (?0rder?). Sign the last page only and do not date or notarize the Order. With the Order, please send in the administrative penalty, by check, written to ?Railroad Commission of Texas.? Reference DP Docket No. 044848 in the check memo, and mail to the RD. Box address found on the bottom of this letter. If you do not agree to this disposition within 30 days of this letter, it will be referred to the Commission?s Legal Enforcement Section, where a formal complaint will be ?led. If you fail to answer the complaint, we will instruct Enforcement to proceed to a default hearing where the administrative penalty sought may reach a maximum penalty amount of $200,000 per day per violation. If you wish to discuss any compliance issues please call Michael Shields at (512) 463-0503. Your company?s c00peration in resolving this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Damage Prevention Oversight and Safety Division Railroad Commission of Texas 170] NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX l296? AUSTIN, TX 7871 [-2967r 0 (512) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 Kari French David Porter, CHAIRMAN DIRECTOR Christi Craddick, COMMISSIONER Ryan Sitton. COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION 455_23 March 1, 2016 METRO BORE ATTN: RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ 102 FAIRMEADOW DR DUNCANVILLE, TX 75] 16?27] I Re: Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848: Violation of Commission Rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, 16 T.A.C. and 18.11(b) at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas on September 21, 2015. Dear RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ: This letter is to advise you that records submitted to the Commission indicate that METRO BORE was in violation'ofthe requirements of Commission Rule 16 T.A.C. and and indicate that METRO BORE was responsible for the subject violations. Speci?cally, METRO BORE violated Commission Rule 16 TAC Sections: 18,4191- The Excavator was not sure the area of excavation was clear and failed to give the Noti?cation Center a second notice prior to excavation activities. 18.11(b1- The Excavator did not submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission within 10 days of the incident. Due to the serious nature of these violations, this matter could be referred to the Commission's Enforcement Section for immediate enforcement action. However, this letter is being sent to you as an offer to settle if METRO BORE will agree to pay an administrative penalty to the Commission for the cited violations. Any settlement will be contingent on: 1) any required compliance and the violations resolved; speci?cally, a Texas Damage Reporting Form (TDRF) must be ?led online for Report Reference Number 159669-1, using Document Key a copy of the report must be mailed to the Commission along with the signed Stipulation, Agreed Settlement and Consent Order, and 2) the payment of an administrative penalty to the Commission and such penalty amount being approved by the Commissioners, and 3) the return of the enclosed Agreed Order with your original signature. Penalty guidelines, found in 16 TAC ?18.12, for these very serious violations support the staff-recommended penalty of $3,000.00, plus an enhancement in the amount of $75,000.00 for a total of $78,000.00. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE 0 POST OFFICE BOX 12967 AUSTIN, TX 7871 1-2967 0 (5l2) ans-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 5l2-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 http:-" gov If you wish to settle this matter with an Agreed Order, please sign and return the attached Stipulation, Agreed Settlement, and Consent Order (?Order?). Sign the last page only and do not date or notarize the Order. With the Order, please send in the administrative penalty, by check, written to ?Railroad Commission of Texas.? Reference DP Docket No. 044848 in the check memo, and mail to the PD. Box address found on the bottom of this letter. If you do not agree to this disposition within 30 days of this letter, it will be referred to the Commission?s Legal Enforcement Section, where a formal complaint will be ?led. If you fail to answer the complaint, we will instruct Enforcement to proceed to a default hearing where the administrative penalty sought may reach a maximum penalty amount of $200,000 per day per violation. If you wish to discuss any compliance issues please call Michael Shields at (512) 463-0503. Your company's cooperation in resolving this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Damage Prevention Oversight and Safety Division Railroad Commission of Texas [701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE 0 POST OFFICE BOX 1296'? AUSTIN, TX 78711-2967 (512) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-135-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 5l2-463-7153 http:-' RAILROAD COWSSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS 1, Kathy Way, Secretary of the Railroad Commission of Texas, do hereby certify as the legal custodian of the records, ?les, and seal of the Railroad Commission of Texas that after a thorough and diligent search of the records and ?les of the Railroad Commission of Texas pertaining to Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848: Enforcement action against Metro Bore for violation of an Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas: 1. of A diligent search of Commission reports reveals that the Respondent either failed to notify the operator through a noti?cation center immediately following the damage incident, failed to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days of the incident, or that the Respondent failed to comply with both noti?cation requirements pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b). A diligent search of Commission reports reveals that the Respondent failed to give a second notice to the noti?cation center prior to excavation pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) when one or more of the following occurred: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict? response ?'om an Operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation and has received an ?all clear or ?no con?ict? response from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. ff: GIVEN under my hand and seal of the Railroad Commission of Texas this. a 7 day EcpJgimbEr ZOH- {t3 Tl i . 1 Kathy Way, Secretary . Railroad Commission of Texas RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF A COMMISSION RULE FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS AFFIDAVIT l, Jamie Renard, Damage Prevention Manager do state that a violation of the following Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule, as documented by the facts in the captioned docket, may result in irreparable harm. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule An Excavator, who is in violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) by failing to comply with 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18 Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, maythreaten the public health and safety of the pe0ple and state of Texas. Any one violation of the Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules under chapter 18 can lead to serious consequences. Violations of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) for not making a second noti?cation when required can lead to such serious consequences as, including but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity, destruction of property, loss of natural resources, and environmental damage or pollution. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b): An Excavator, who is in violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by failing to comply with 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18 Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, may threaten the public health and safety of the people and state of Texas. Any one violation of the Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules under chapter 18 can lead to serious consequences. Failure to comply with TDRF ?ling requirements for excavation activities may impede the Commission's goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. Excavation damage is the largest single cause of pipeline accidents and of deaths and injuries resulting from pipeline accidents. I . re Renard, Manager A SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me on this the a '7 2?cher MW 2011. Wm KATHY WAY NOTARY PUB Notary Public-Stats ofTaxasI' in and for the State of Texas Notarle #12698392?7 1 commission ae. JULY 22. 2021 Notary without Bond ALEXANDER C. SCI-IOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL CHRISTI .CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN DAVID W. COONEY, .IR., DIRECTOR RYAN STITON, COMMISSIONER WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER ENFORCEMENT SECTION RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL July 19, 2017 Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS NOTICE OF HEARING On September 28, 2017, a hearing will be held at 9:00 am in the William B. Travis Building, 1701 North Congress, Austin, Texas to determine whether Abry Brothers (Houston), LLC ("Respondent") has violated provisions of the Railroad Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as alleged more fully in the attached Original Complaint, which is hereby incorporated by reference. This hearing will be held under the jurisdiction and authority of: Chapter 2001 of the Texas Government Code; Section 121.201 of Chapter 121 of the Texas Utilities Code; Sections 117.011-117.012 of Chapter 117 of the Texas Natural Resources Code; and Sect-ion 756.126 of Chapter 756 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. For room assignment, please check the bulletin board in the ?rst ?oor lobby on the morning of the hearing. IF ANY PARTY DESIRES A WRITTEN TRANSCRIPT of the hearing, that party should notify the Docket Services of?ce at (512) 463-6848, at least ?ve (5) working days in advance of the hearing date. If a written transcript is requested, the commission may assess the cost of the transcript to one or more parties. Unless any party requests a written transcript, the record will be made by audio tape recording. ANY PARTY MAY REQUEST A TELEPHONIC PROCEEDING. Section 1.130 of the Railroad Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.130], provides requests for telephonic proceedings must be in writing, include all pertinent telephone number(s), require the consent of all parties and be made more than twenty(20) days prior to the proceeding. You may contact the undersigned attorney forfurther explanation. ANY INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY who needs auxiliary aids or services in order to have an equal opportunity to effectively communicate and participate in this hearing must request such aids or services AT LEAST TWO WEEKS prior to the hearing date by notifying the Personnel Of?ce of the Railroad 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE 1i: POST OFFICE Box 12967 AUSTIN, TEXAS ir PHONE: 512/463-6762 Fax: 512546-6989 TDD 800-735-2939 OR TDY 512463-7284 AN EQUAL EMPLOYER tx.us Notice of Hearing. Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 Commission at PO. Box 12987, Austin TX 78711-2967, by phone at (512) 483-7327, or by TDD at 1-800-735-2989. Metro Bore is directed to appear at this hearing. Requests for continuance are governed by Section 1.124 of the Railroad Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure ffex. R.R. Comm'n, t6 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.124]. Grant of a continuance may be conditioned on your agreement to appear at a de?nite later date. IF YOU DECIDE TO REQUESTA CONTINUANCE, AWRITTEN MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE MUST BE RECEIVED IN DOCKET SERVICES NOT LESS THAN FIVE (5) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE. DOCKET SERVICES WILL THEN FORWARD THE MOTION TO THE ASSIGNED EXAMINER. ONLY THE EXAMINER MAY GRANT A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE. A COPY OF THE MOTION MUST ALSO BE SERVED AT THE SAME TIME ON THE UNDERSIGNED ATTORNEY. The motion must: 1) set forth speci?c grounds for which the continuance is sought; 2) make reference to all similar motions filed in the proceeding; and 3) state whether all parties (including the undersigned Enforcement attorney) agree with the motion for continuance. To determine Enforcement's position regarding such a motion, you may contact the undersigned at (512) 463-2088. The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and inspection reports which will be offered into evidence in this case. The ?le is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inspection or cepying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858 to discuss the matter. Under Section 81.0531, Texas Natural Resources Code, the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000.00 per day per vioiation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs. and attorneys? fees being adjudged against you. OFFER OF SETTLEMENT if you agree to settle this matter for the violations set forth in the Second Amended Original Complaint, which including the ?ling the damage report and payment of an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by August 29, 2017, I will recommend the Commission settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our of?ce by contacting me at the number below my signature. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it, reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. Notice of Hearing. Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 3 IF YOU DO NOT THIS CASE OR APPEAR AT THE SCHEDULED HEARING IN A MANNER DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, STAFF WILL REQUEST THAT A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU. ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU APPEAR WITHOUT HAVING FILED A NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR, THE STAFF WILL REQUEST THAT THE HEARING BE POSTPONED TO A DATE AND TIME TO BE DETERMINED BY THE EXAMINER. Sincerely, Hwy?Lu?: wwaj' Hailey A. WolI, Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS ENFORCEMENT SECTION OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL P. 0. BOX 12967 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2967 NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR DP Docket No. Respondent: Metro Bore Hearing Date: September 28, 2017 representing . (Print Name) (Print Name) hereby gives notice of intent to appear at the hearing called to consider the above referenced legal enforcement case. Signature Date Printed Name and Title Mailing Address Telephone THIS NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR MUST BE MAILED TO THE RAILROAD CONINIISSION OF TEXAS, ENFORCEMENT SECTION, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, P. 0. BOX 12967, AUSTIN, TX 78711-2967, WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING. THE STAFF WILL PRESUME THAT YOU DO NOT INTEND TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING IF THIS NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR IS NOT FILED AS REQUIRED. THE STAFF WILL REQUEST THAT A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR. ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU APPEAR WITHOUT HAVING FILED THIS NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR, THE STAFF WILL REQUEST THAT THE HEARING BE POSTPONED TO A DATE AND TIME TO BE DETERMINED BY THE EXAMNER. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS 47.x, DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT Ag METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RUL n. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, SECOND AMENDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Comes now the Railroad Commission Of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this Second Amended Original Complaint Charging Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with violations of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) and Rule 1 1 at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION 1. The Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent under TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?121.201, TEX. NAT. RESOURCES CODE ?117.011-117.012 and TEX. 9 HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ?756.126(g) which establishes the Railroad Commission Of Texas authority relating to the prevention Of damage to pipeline facilities resulting from the movement Of earth by a person 'in the vicinity of the facility. Pursuant to the Railroad Commission's General Rule Of Practice and Procedure ?1.48(g) lTex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE the Commission Shall serve documents by mail or by personal delivery. This second amended original complaint and notice Of hearing and settlement Offer is being served via personal delivery by a process server, at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairrneadows Dr., Duncanville, Texas 75116, the "Excavator address" reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form ?led on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent to a One- Call Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8, 2015, ticket number 1575144185. The Commission contends that the service on the address constitutes suf?cient notice to establish the Commissions personal jurisdiction over Respondent. Second Amended Original ComplaintI Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 2. Respondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic. or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1(a) at the captioned location. The Respondent is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid-Texas Div. ("Operator") designated Respondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commission a TDRF report on November 11, 2015, for the subject incident. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(a) 1- Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) ex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict" response from an operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation and has received an ?all clear or "no con?ict" response from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation arear or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. Respondent became aware of and had knowledge of the erroneous positive response because while excavating Respondentobserved that the pipeline continued past the markings. Respondent was aware of unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation after receiving an ?all clear or "no con?ict? response and continued excavation. The Respondent stated, during his deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigation (See ?le for copy of the deposition pages 19?22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 Investigations) that he knew the markings were inaccurate yet continued to excavate. Respondent indicated that the markings from the ?rst notice, or response, stopped at the curb yet the pipeline continued past the markings onto the sidewalk. Once Respondent became aware of the unmarked pipeline Respondent continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center as required. (See pages 19-22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of property; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. CODE requires each excavatorthatdamages an underground pipeline to notify the operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b), must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days of the incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference No. 159606 for the subject damage incident. Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 4 2.2. On October 13. 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst ciass mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 forthe subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by ?rst class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingentupon Respondent's compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); speci?cally, submission of Respondent's Excavator report Reference No. 159669 forthe subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that. as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent's violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a vioiation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to compiy with the reporting requirements of the Commission could impede goais to collect and share statisticai data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. Second Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 5 PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing Respondent an administrative penalty of $78,000.00 (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(a) at $1,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries for a total of $50,000.00, plus $25,000.00 for the impact to the residential and public area for a total enhancement amount of or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing Respondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and 3. ordering any other relief to which, underthe pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. Respectfully submitted, Hailey A. Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463-2088 FAX No. (512) 483-7001 P. O. Box 12967 Austin, Texas 78711-2967 Dated: July 19, 2017 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day July 19, 2017 I have provided a copy of this Notice of Hearing, together with a copy of the Second Amended Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848,to Texas Legal Connection, be served personally on Metro Bore. Effective date of service wilt be the date upon which citation of service is signed, properly addressed as below: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairrneadows Dr. Duncanvilie. Texas 75116 $4.034? at A. Wolf, Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 cc; Damage Prevention Section-Austin RETURN OF SERVICE RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABLAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS The attached Notice of Hearing, Second Amended Original Complaint, and Certi?cate of Service in the above referenced docket has been served in person on Metro Bore, by delivery to Metro Bore at the request of the Respondent, by telephone conversation, the Respondent was served at 534 Holly Ln. Duncanville, Texas 75116 on 7/27/20! 7 at I :02 AM, and leaving said instrument with Rigo Yanez Owner of Metro Bore. Executed in Dallas, State of Texas, on the 27"? day ofJnIy 2017'. STEVEN LTRENI {Name of person who served instrument] PROCESS SERVER {Title of person who served insowmentf SCH 9 1 2 [process server Identification Number] 4730/2019 [Expiration date of certh?icotion] On September 28, 2017, a hearing will be held at 9:00 am in the William B. Travis Building. 1701 North Congress, Austin, Texas. This hearing will be held under thejurisdiction and authority of: Chapter 2001 of the Texas Government Code; Section 121.201 of Chapter 121 of the Texas Utilities Code; Sections I 17011-117012 of Chapter 117 of the Texas Natural Resources Code; and Section 756.126 of Chapter 73 6 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. For room assignment, please check the bulletin board in the ?rst floor lobb}r on the morning of the hearing. SIGNATURE OF PERSON SERVING CONIPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING My name is Stevenl?'em', and my address is PO Box 80181 I, and USA . I declare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Dallas County, Texas, on the 27'?1 day of July, 2017. SW Signature CHRISTI CRADDICR, CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL DAVID PORTER, COMMISSIONER DAVID W. ., Dm??a RYAN COMMISSIONER (3 SEC 5,159} EN..- {in RAIIROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS gag; OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL December 19, 2016 Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Re: DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF A COMMISSION RULE FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED) WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS, RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO AN INTRASTATE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE 0N SEPTEMBER 21, 2015. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING Information on ?le in our of?ce indicates that Metro Bore has violated a provision of the Railroad Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as set forth more fully in the attached Original Complaint. This letter is notice Of the captioned docket pending against Metro Bore. According to Section 1.49 of the Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.49] which was adopted effective April 2, 1996, you may, within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this notice, ?le an answer or request a hearing to contest the allegations of the Original Complaint. The date of service of this notice is computed under Statewide Rule 48(g) [Tex. R.R. Comm?n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE amended effective June 1, 1991. You may hire an attorney or other representative or choose to appear on your own behalf. Section 1.49 also provides that if, on the thirty-?rst (Slst) day after the date of service, you have not entered into an agreed settlement order, ?led an answer to the Original Complaint, or requested a hearing, a default ?nal order may thereafter be issued against you without further notice. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE Posr OFFICE Box 12967 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2967 PHONE: 512/463-6762 FAX: 512/463-6989 TDD 300-735-2989 OR TDY 512-463-7284 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER nan: mus Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and Texas Damage Report Forms which will be offered into evidence in this case. The ?le is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inspection or copying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858. Under 121.206, Texas Utility Code, the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000 per day per violation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs, and attorneys' fees being adjudged against you. OFFER 0F SETTLEMENT If you agree to settle this matter for the violation set forth in the Original Complaint and pay an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by January 24, 2016, I will recommend that the Commission settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Checks should be made out to the "Railroad Commission of Texas" and should include the docket number on the check. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our of?ce by contacting me at the number below. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it, reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. IF YOU DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE, FILE AN ANSWER TO THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT, OR REQUEST A HEARING, A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER MAY BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. a. . U943 Hailey A. Wolf, Skiff Attorney Of?ce of General ?ounsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463?2088 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, Certi?ed Return Receipt Requested postage fully prepaid, on this the 19th day of December 2016, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairrneadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 C. M. No. lill. 71.88 lil'il?ll. 71332 I875E LIEIEJ. I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the Original Complaint in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, ?rst-class postage ?Jlly prepaid, on this the 19 day of December 2016, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 urn/- Bill Drury, Legal Ainstant Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-6858 cc.- Damage Prevention Section-Austin a frgl-I gt?? RAILROAD COMMISSION OF ?470,. 31.. DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RULEs?r?Pfgitg, 423' 5, UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 - (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS Pref vi, 1 Iii-D. ?1 ?It; 910: ha ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Comes now the Railroad Commission of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this Original Complaint charging Rigo Yanez and Adan Yanez, individually and d/b/a Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with violations of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules 4(e) and 11(b) at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION 1. The Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent undeTEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ??121.201 and underTEX. NAT. RES. CODE ANN. ??117.011?117.012 and under TEX. HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ??756. 126. Under the Railroad Commission's General Rule of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comm?n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE notice Of hearing may be served on Respondent by regular mail and by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr., Duncanville, Texas 751.16, the "Excavator address reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent to a One-Call Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8, 2015, ticket number 1575144185. 2. ReSpondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the Vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18. at the captioned location. The ReSpondent is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid?Texas Div. ("Operator") designated Respondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commissinn a TDRF report on November 1 1, 2015, for the subject incident. Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(e) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict? reSponse from an operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the prOposed excavation and has received an ?all clear or ?no con?ict? response from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. The Excavator was aware that the positive response was obviously erroneous and failed to provide a second notice to the noti?cation center. The Excavator stated that he knew the markings were in the wrong location and proceeded to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center. The Excavator stated that he knew the pipelines were not marked properly. The markings stepped once it reached the curb but the Excavator continued to dig and determined that the pipeline continued and was then aware of the erroneous markings but continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center after he became aware of the error. (S ee pages 19-22 of Ri go Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations) 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of property; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1 [Tex. R.R. Comm?n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.l requires each excavator that damages an underground pipeline to notify the operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days of the incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference No. 159606 for the subject damage incident. 2.2. On October 13, 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst class mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by first class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingent upon Respondent's compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); speci?cally, submission of Respondent?s Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that, as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 4 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. ReSpondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Commission could impede goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing ReSpondentanadministrative penaltyof $78,000.00 (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(e) at $1,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries, plus $25 ,0000 for the impact to the residential and public area), or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing Respondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 5 3. ordering any other relief to which, under the pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. Respect?JlIy submitted, 7L . ?ailey A. Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463-2088 FAX No. (512) 463?7001 P. 0. Box 12967 Austin, Texas 78711?2967 Dated: December 19, 2016 CHRISTI CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL RYAN SITTON, COMMISSIONER DAVID W. COONEY, JR., DIRECTOR WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER ENFORCEMENT SECTION RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS a, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL February 1,2017 0? Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Re: DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF A COMMISSION RULE FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED) WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS, RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO AN INTRASTATE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2015. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING Information on ?le in our of?ce indicates that Metro Bore has violated a provision of the Railroad Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as set forth more fully in the attached First Amended Original Complaint. This letter is notice of the captioned docket pending against Metro Bore. According to Section 1.49 of the Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.49] which was adopted effective April 2, 1996, you may, within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this notice, ?le an answer or request a hearing to contest the allegations of the First Amended Original Complaint. The date of service of this notice is computed under Statewide Rule 48(g) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE amended effective June 1, 1991. You may hire an attorney or other representative or choose to appear on your own behalf. Section 1.49 also provides that if, on the thirty-?rst (3lst) day after the date of service, you have not entered into an agreed settlement order, ?led an answer to the First Amended Original Complaint, or requested a hearing, a default final order may thereafter be issued against you without further notice. 1701 Noam CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE Box 12967 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2967 PHONE: 512/463-6762 Fax: 512/463-6989 TDD 800-735-2989 OR 512-463?7284 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER us Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and Texas Damage Report Forms which will be offered into evidence in this case. The ?le is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inspection or copying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858. Under 121.206, Texas Utility Code. the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000 per day per violation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs, and attorneys' fees being adjudged against you. OFFER 0F SETTLEMENT If you agree to settle this matter for the violation set forth in the First Amended Original Complaint and pay an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by March 10, 2017, I will recommend that the Commission Settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Checks should be made out to the "Railroad Commission of Texas" and should include the docket number on the check. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our of?ce by contacting me at the number below. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it, reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. IF YOU DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE, FILE AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT, OR REQUEST A HEARING, A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER MAY BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. Sincerely, aim 7N 03%? A. Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463?2088 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the First Amended Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, Certi?ed Return Receipt Requested postage fully prepaid, on this the 1111 day of February 2017, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairrneadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 CoMoNo. "ll 71:19 l=l?l?ll. 71133 Will- I hereby certify that have served a c0py of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a c0py of the First Amended Original Complaint in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, ?rst-class postage fully prepaid, on this the day of February 2017, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 0W. Qum/ Bill Drury, Legal Afstam Of?ce of General unsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-6858 cc: Damage Prevention Section?Austin b- a RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS 93,4137; . 9 FIRST ANIENDED ORIGINAL CONIPLAINT Comes now the Railroad Commission of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this First Amended Original Complaint charging Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with violations of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules 4(e) and 11(b) at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION l. The Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent undeTEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ??121.201 and underTEX. NAT. RES. CODEANN. ??117.011?117.012 and under TEX. HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ??756. 126. Under the Railroad Commission's General Rule of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comrn'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE notice of hearing may be served on Respondent by regular mail and by Certi?ed Mail, Return Receipt Requested, at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr., Duncanville, Texas 75116, the "Excavator address" reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent to a One-Call Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8, 2015, ticket number 1575144185. 2. Respondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18. at the captioned location. The Respondent is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid-Texas Div. ("Operator") designated Respondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commission a TDRF report on November 11, 2015, for the subject incident. First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(e) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [Tex R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict? response from an operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation and has received an ?all clear or ?no con?ict? reSponse from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No. 043 00. The Respondent stated that he knew the markings were wrong yet continued to excavate during his deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigation (S ee ?le for copy of the deposition pages 19-22 of Ri go Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). Respondent indicated that the markings from the ?rst notice stopped at the curb yet the pipeline continued past the markings onto the sidewalk. Respondent became aware and had knowledge of the erroneous positive response because while excavating he determined that the pipeline continued past the markings. Once Respondent became aware of the unmarked pipeline Respondent continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center as required. (See pages 19?22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of property; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1 requires each excavator that damages an underground pipeline to notify the Operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (l0) days of the incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21. 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference No. 159606 for the subject damage incident. 2.2. On October 13, 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst class mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by ?rst class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingent upon Respondent?s compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); speci?cally, submission of Respondent?s Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that, as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 4 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1(b) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Commission could impede goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(e) at $1,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries, plus $25,0000 for the impact to the residential and public area), or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing ReSpondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and 3. ordering any other relief to which, under the pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. Respect?illy submitted, First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 5 Hai1\e?y A. Wolf] Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463-2088 FAX No. (512) 463-7001 P. O. Box 12967 Austin, Texas 78711-2967 Dated: February 1, 2017 CHRISTI CRADDICR, CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL RYAN COMMISSIONER DAVID W. COONEY, JR., DIRECTOR WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER ENFORCEMENT SECTION RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS .4, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL February 1, 2017 Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Re: DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF A COMMISSION RULE FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED) WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS, RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO AN INTRASTATE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2015. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING Information on ?le in our of?ce indicates that Metro Bore has violated a provision Of the Railroad Conunission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as set forth more fully in the attached First Amended Original Complaint. This letter is notice of the captioned docket pending against Metro Bore. According to Section 1.49 Of the Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.49] which was adopted effective April 2, 1996, you may, within thirty (30) days of the date Of service of this notice, file an answer or request a hearing to contest the allegations of the First Amended Original Complaint. The date Of service of this notice is computed under Statewide Rule 48(g) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE amended effective June 1, 1991. You may hire an attorney or other representative or choose to appear on your own behalf. Section 1.49 also provides that if, on the thirty-?rst (3lst) day after the date of service, you have not entered into an agreed settlement order, ?led an answer to the First Amended Original Complaint, or requested a hearing, a default f'mal order may thereafter be issued against you without further notice. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE Box 12967 AUSTIN. 78711-2967 PHONE: 512/463-6762 FAX: 512/463-6989 TDD 800-735-2989 OR TDY 512-463-7234 AN EQUAL EMPLOYER us Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and Texas Damage Report Forms which will be offered into evidence in this case. The file is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inspection or copying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858. Under 121.206, Texas Utility Code, the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000 per day per violation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs, and attorneys' fees being adjudged against you. OFFER 0F SETTLEMENT If you agree to settle this matter for the violation set forth in the First Amended Original Complaint and pay an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by March 10, 2017, I will recommend that the Commission settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Checks should be made out to the "Railroad Commission of Texas and should include the docket number on the check. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our of?ce by contacting me at the number below. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it. reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. IF YOU DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE, FILE AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST ANIENDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT, OR REQUEST A HEARING, A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER MAY BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. Sincerely, F1th 7N ?2343 HaiIxey A. Wblf, Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the First Amended Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, Certi?ed Return Receipt Requested postage fully prepaid, on this the 1"l day of February 2017, prOperly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 COMONO. 71:19 I?l?l?ll 71332 I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the First Amended Original Complaint in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, ?rst-class postage fully prepaid, on this the ltil day of February 2017, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Bill Drury, Legal As istant Office of General unsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-6858 cc: Damage Prevention Section-Austin 3 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS if"? DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ACTION a. METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RULES x34, UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 . (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS 5K 5" I mix? Jab-'3: rli' . FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Comes now the Railroad Commission of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this First Amended Original Complaint charging Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with Violations of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules 4(e) and 11(b) at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION 1. The Commission has jurisdiction over the ReSpondent undeTEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ??12l.201 and underTEX. NAT. RES. CODE ANN. ??117.011?117.012 and under TEX. HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ??756. 126. Under the Railroad Commission's General Rule of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comm?n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE notice of hearing may be served on Respondent by regular mail and by Certi?ed Mail, Return Receipt Requested, at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr., DuncanVille, Texas 75116, the "Excavator address" reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent to a One-Call Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8, 2015, ticket number 1575144185. 2. Respondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.l(a) at the captioned location. The Respondent is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid-Texas Div. ("Operator") designated Respondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commission a TDRF report on November 2015, for the subject incident. First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(e) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict? response from an Operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation and has received an ?all clear or ?no con?ict" response from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No. 043 00. The Respondent stated that he knew the markings were wrong yet continued to excavate during his deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigation (See ?le for copy of the deposition pages 19-22 of Ri go Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). ReSpondent indicated that the markings from the ?rst notice stopped at the curb yet the pipeline continued past the markings onto the sidewalk. Respondent became aware and had knowledge of the erroneous positive response because while excavating he determined that the pipeline continued past the markings. Once Respondent became aware of the unmarked pipeline Respondent continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center as required. (See pages 19-22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, ReSpondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 4. ReSpondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of preperty; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1(b) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.l requires each excavator that damages an underground pipeline to notify the operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days ofthe incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference No. 159606 for the subject damage incident. 2.2. On October 13, 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst class mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by ?rst class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingent upon Respondent?s compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); specifically, submission of Respondent?s Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that, as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. First Amended Original Complaint, Damage PreVention Docket No. 44848, page 4 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 le) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Commission could impede goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing Respondent an administrative penaltyof $78,000.00 (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(e) at $1,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries, plus $25,0000 for the impact to the residential and public area), or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing ReSpondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and 3. ordering any other relief to which, under the pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. ReSpectfully submitted, First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page rimmk Hail??y A. Wolf/Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463?2088 FAX No. (512) 463-7001 P. O. Box 12967 Austin, Texas 78711-2967 Dated: February 1, 2017 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE. Date: January 30, 2017 hailey wolf: The following is in response to your January 30, 2017 request for delivery information on your Certi?ed MailTM item number 9171999991703297524081. The delivery record shows that this item was delivered on December 21, 2016 at 12:43 pm in HOUSTON, TX 77070. The scanned image of the recipient information is provided below. mm" ?3 ?ay/ah ?(Lin (113.! 4? Signature of Recipient Address of Recipient: . . Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional assistance, please contact your local Post Of?ce or postal representative. Sincerely, United States Postal Service 1r30r2017 - USPS Tracking? English Customer Service USPS Mobile Register: Sign In Still Have Questions? USPS Tracking? grammes. Get Easy Tracking Updates i Sign up for My USPS. Tracking Number: 9171999991703297524081 On Time Updated Delivery Day: Wednesday, December 21. 2016 Prod uct Tracking Information Available Actions Postal Product: Features: Ma?a: Cam-?ed Mail" Return Receipt Electronic DATE 8- TIME STATUS OF Text Updates December 21. 201 6 . 12:43 Delivered~ Individual Picked pm Up at Postal Facility TX "on Email Updates Effi?embe' 213015 6'23 Available for Pickup HOUSTON. Tx 77269 December 21.2016 .5 21 am Arrived at Unit HOUSTON. TX 77070 December 20 2016. 11 49 NORTH pm Departed USPS Facility HOUSTON. TX 77315 December 20 2016 . 8:43 NORTH am Arrived at USPS Facil ty HOUSTON. TX 1.7315 gamma 19- 2?15 3'40 Departed USPS Facil ty AUSTIN. TX 73710 December 19, 2016 . 7 24 Arrived at USPS Origin pm Facility AUSTIN. TX 78710 December 19. 2016 . 6'09 Accepted at USPS Origin pm Facility AUSTIN.TX 78701 Pre-Shipment Info Sent to Dewmber ?9 2015 uses. USPS Awaiting Item Track Another Package Manage incoming Packages Tracking (or receipt) number Track all your packages irom dashboard. No tracking numbers necessary 1 Track It Sign up for My USPS a Print Your Documents Ship Request Form Page 1 of Ship Request U90364 Sender Recipient Name: William Drury Attn To: Account 45502 COMM JONES Company: Metro Bore Phone: 513 463-6858 Address: 102i Fairmeadows Dr Email: bill drury@rrc.slate txis Company: CPA TPASS City: DuncanViue State: TX Zip: 75116 Track: 9171999991703297474911 Country: US Shipping Instructions Items Units Description Code Origin Unit Value Total Value 0 00 2/1 .5201 7 Print Your Documents Ship Request Form Page I of I Ship Request 033415 Ill Sender Recipient Name: William Drury Attn To: Account 45502 COMM JONES Company: Metro Bore Phone: 513463-6656 Address: 102 Fairmeadows Dr Email: bill.drury@rrc state tx.is Company: CPA TPASS City: Duncanville State: TX Zip: 75116 Track: 9171999991703297524081 Country: US Shipping Instructions Items Units Description Code Origin Unit Value Total Value 0 00 12.519.2016 DOCKET 044848 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEAAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 044848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION COMMISSION RULE 16 TAC and and 18.11(b) AT 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS TIP LATI RE MENT ND RD On this day the above-entitled and numbered docket came on for consideration by the Railroad Commission of Texas ("Commission"). The Oversight and Safety Division of the Commission, and METRO BORE, through their representatives, have agreed to an informal disposition of the matters under this docket through this Consent Order ("Order"), subject to the approval of the Commission. The Commission has authority to informally dispose of this case through a consent order pursuant to TEX. CODE ANN. 2001.056 (1-3). IN SETTLEMENT OF THIS DOCKET, the Commission and METRO BORE do hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 1. METRO BORE is a person engaged in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under Title 16, ?18.1(a) of the Texas Administrative Code. 2. METRO BORE is a "person" as that term is de?ned by Title 16, ?18.2(16) of the Texas Administrative Code. 3. The Commission and METRO BORE agree that the alleged violations, as set forth in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848, regarding 16 TAC and and 18.11(b) on September 21, 2015, at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas, are hereby settled and compromised under the terms of this Order. 4. The alleged violations by METRO BORE constitute an alleged violation of a safety standard or rule relating to the prevention of damage to facilities containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide. 5. Neither this Order, nor any written or oral Offer of settlement related thereto, nor any statement contained therein shall constitute evidence or an admission or adjudication of: (A) any fact or conclusion of law alleged in or relating to Damage Prevention Docket NO. 044848; (B) any violation of any statute, rule or regulation or other wrongdoing or misconduct on the part of METRO BORE or any director, of?cer, agent, employee, contractor or af?liate thereof. 6. The Commission and METRO BORE wish to further the goal of safe Operations Of earth movement activities near pipelines containing flammable, toxic or corrosive gas, hazardous liquids, or carbon dioxide, within the State of Texas. 7. The Commission has considered any history of previous violations by METRO BORE, the seriousness of any alleged violation, and any hazard to the health or safety of the public, and has determined that the facts of this case warrant an informal disposition of the Commission's concerns 10. 11. 12. under the terms of this Order. METRO BORE has elected not to avail itself of the opportunity for public hearing. The Commission has jurisdiction to assess an administrative penalty against METRO BORE, pursuant to Sections 121.206 and 121.207 of the Texas Utilities Code. An administrative penalty in the amount of SEVENTY SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS shall be recovered by the Commission for the alleged violations asserted against METRO BORE. Respondent has placed, in the possession of the Commission, ?nds in the amount of SEVENTY SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS for deposit in the General Revenue Fund, as payment of administrative penalty assessed in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848. The person signing hereunder for METRO BORE has authority to represent METRO BORE in this matter. Jurisdiction of this docket having been established and an agreement of the parties having been reached, it is, therefore, ORDERED by the Railroad Commission of Texas that METRO BORE be assessed an administrative penalty in the amount of SEVENTY SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS and that Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848 be informally disposed of by the Consent Order and closed. All relief not granted in this Order is DENIED. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS (Order approved and signature af?xed by Master Agreed Order dated I APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: METRO BORE By: Signature Title: Please print your name Please print your title RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION Penalty Calculation Worksheet for Docket No. 044848 (1 Rule Cited Rule Description 3&3; Amount 18.4(d) Excavator did not make a visual check for any unmarked $1,000.00 1,000.00 underground pipelines. 18.4(e) The Excavator was not sure the area of excavation was clear and $1,000.00 1,000.00 failed to give the Noti?cation Center a second notice prior to excavation activities. 18.11(b) The Excavator did not submit a report of the damage incident to the $2,000.00 2,000.00 Commission within 10 days ofthe incident. Subtotal of Penalty Amount 4,000.00 Reduction for settlement before hearing: 50% 3 2,000.00 Subtotal (Penalty Amount minus Settlement Reduction): 31 2,000.00 Penalty Enhancement Amount: 75,000.00 Subtotal (Penalty Amount - Settlement Reduction Enhancement Amt): 77,000.00 Reduction for demonstrated good faith of person charged: 0.00 Total Penalty: 77,000.00 Page 1 of 1 Date: January 11, 2016 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 044848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION COMMISSION RULE 16 TAC and 18.11(b) AT 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS STIPULATION, AGREED SETTLEMENT AND CONSENT ORDER On this day the above-entitled and numbered docket came on for consideration by the Railroad Commission of Texas ("Commission"). The Oversight and Safety Division of the Commission, and METRO BORE, through their representatives, have agreed to an informal di5position of the matters under this docket through this Consent Order ("Order"), subject to the approval of the Commission. The Commission has authority to informally dispose of this case through a consent order pursuant to TEX. CODE ANN. 2001.056 (1-3). 1N SETTLEMENT OF THIS DOCKET, the Commission and METRO BORE do hereby agree and stipulate as follows: I. METRO BORE is a person engaged in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under Title 16, ?18.1(a) of the Texas Administrative Code. 2. METRO BORE is a "person" as that term is de?ned by Title 16, ?18.2(16) of the Texas Administrative Code. 3. The Commission and METRO BORE agree that the alleged violations, as set forth in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848, regarding 16 TAC and 18.1 l(b) on September 21, 2015, at 12 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas, are hereby settled and compromised under the terms of this Order. 4. The alleged violations by METRO BORE constitute an alleged violation of a safety standard or rule relating to the prevention of damage to facilities containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide. 5. Neither this Order, nor any written or oral offer of settlement related thereto, nor any statement contained therein shall constitute evidence or an admission or adjudication of: (A) any fact or conclusion of law alleged in or relating to Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848; (B) any violation of any statute, rule or regulation or other wrongdoing or misconduct on the part of METRO BORE or any director, of?cer, agent, employee, contractor or af?liate thereof. 6. The Commission and METRO BORE wish to further the goal of safe operations of earth movement activities near pipelines containing ?ammable, toxic or corrosive gas, hazardous liquids, or carbon dioxide, within the State of Texas. 7. The Commission, has considered any history of previous violations by METRO BORE, the seriousness of any alleged violation, and any hazard to the health or safety of the public, and has determined that the facts of this case warrant an informal disposition of the Commission's concerns under the terms of this Order. 10. 11. METRO BORE has elected not to avail itself of the opportunity for public hearing. The Commission has jurisdiction to assess an administrative penalty against METRO BORE, pursuant to Sections 121.206 and 121.207 of the Texas Utilities Code. An administrative penalty in the amount of SEVENTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS shall be recovered by the Commission for the alleged violations asserted against METRO BORE. Respondent has placed, in the possession of the Commission, funds in the amount of SEVENTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS for deposit in the General Revenue Fund, as payment of administrative penalty assessed in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848. The person signing hereunder for METRO BORE has authority to represent METRO BORE in this matter. Jurisdiction of this docket having been established and an agreement of the parties having been reached, it is, therefore, ORDERED by the Railroad Commission of Texas that METRO BORE be assessed an administrative penalty in the amount of SEVENTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS and that Damage Prevention Docket No. 044848 be informally disposed of by the Consent Order and closed. All reliefnot granted in this Order is DENIED. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS (Order approved and signature af?xed by Master Agreed Order dated APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: METRO BORE Signature Title: Please print your name Please print your title RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION Penalty Calculation Worksheet for Docket No. 044848 Rule Cited Rule Description Amount 18.4(e) The Excavator was not sure the area of excavation was clear and $1,000.00 1,000.00 failed to give the Noti?cation Center a second notice prior to excavation activities. 18.1 1(b) The Excavator did not submit a report of the damage incident to the $2,000.00 2,000.00 Commission within 10 days of the incident. Subtotal of Penalty Amount 3,000.00 Reduction for settlement before hearing: 0% 0.00 Subtotal (Penalty Amount minus Settlement Reduction): 8 3,000.00 Penalty Enhancement Amount: 75,000.00 Subtotal (Penalty Amount - Settlement Reduction Enhancement Amt): 78,000.00 Reduction for demonstrated good faith of person charged: 3 0,00 Total Penalty: 78,000.00 Page 1 of1 Date: March 18, 2016 11CKET 1575144185 Ticket Number: 1575144185 Old Ticket: Source: Hours Notice: COMPANY Voice Type: 48 Date: INFORMATION METRO BORE 102 FAIRM EADOWS DUNCANVILLE, TX 75116 Phone: (469) 223?1261 Fax: (214) 630?3001 Callback: 0800 - 1700 WORK INF State: County: Place: Street: Intersection: Explosives: Map Book: ORMATION TX ELLIS WAXAHACHIE 105 Arabian rd Thoroughbred St False DRIVING DIRECTIONS starting at 105 Arabian Rd. Please mark the street on the West side of the Cul de sac towards Saratoga Drive, Please continue to mark the entire length of Arabian Rd. REMARKS Work Date: 8/14/201 5 12:00:00 PM 32.347951, ?96.784678 MEMBERS CODE TXNI ASE WAX GWP WXZ NAME At&t Atmos Midtx City of Waxahachie Gateway Pipeline Company Oncor Electric Distribution 2:53 Type: Contact: Contact Phone: Contact Email: Caller: Caller Phone: Caller Email: Work Date: Done For: Contractor RIGO YANEZ (469) 223?1261 rigoyane286@gmail.com RIGO YANEZ (469) 223?1261 rigoyane286@gmail.com 5 3:00 PM Deeper Than 16": True Duration: Nature of Work: Whitelined: 2 MONTHS INSTALLING FIBER OPTIC CABLE True RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION - Pipeline Damage Prevention TEXAS DAMAGE REPORTING FORM Please print (and retain) this page as a confirmation of receipt of your Damage Report for the following incident: Incident 194999 Reference 159999-1 Date: 99(2112915 County: Incident Information CitylSubdivision/Location Waxahachie Street Name 112 ARABIAN RD Nearest Intersection THOROUGHBRED LatitudelLongitude Filer Information Company Name METRO BORE Contact Name RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ Street Address 102 FAIRMEADOW DR City, State Zip DUNCANVILLE, TX 75116 2711 Phone (469) 223-1261 Email If you have any supporting documentation to submit for this report (such as a line locate ticket, color photos, maps, etc), or the Commission contacts you for additional information, use this page as .3 Fax or Mailing cover sheet to convey the documents, or email your information with the incident and reference number in the Subject line to: TDRFInfo@rrc.texas.gov. (Do Not FAX Photos) FAX this page as your cover sheet and Mail 3 COPY 01' this Page and any other any other documents to: 512-463-7153 documents to: Railroad Commission of Texas Page 1 of Pipeline Damage Prevention PO. Box 12967 Austin, TX 78711-2967 If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact the Pipeline Damage Prevention section of the OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION at 512-475-0512. TDRF Rev. rexas Damage Reporting Form Submitted to RRC on Incident Reference Incident Date: Who is submitting thisinformation? StakeholderlSubmitter. Name of person providing the information: P5 Operator Information Operator P5 Number: Operator Full Name: Operator Address: Operator Address Line 2: City. State. Zip: Representative Name: Representative Phone: Not Applicable [for Excavator and Public Reports) Excavator Contact Information Excavator Company Name: Excavator Address: City. State. Zip: Excavator Contact Name: Excavator Contact Phone Number: Excavator Contact Fax Number: Excavator Email Address: METRO BORE 102 FAIRMEADOW DR DUNCANVILLE, TX 75116 2711 RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ (469) 223-1261 Other Contact Information (General Contractor) Company Name: Not Applicable Address: City. State. Zip: Contact Name: Contact Phone Number: Contact Fax Number: Email Address: Excavation Information Type of Excavator: Pipeline Damaged With: Type of Work Performed: Did the operator provide the excavator with notice of reporting requirements: Date and Location of Incident see RRC Note below) Date of Incident: 09l21l2015 8 30 AM State: . Texas (USA) County; ELLIS CityiSubdivisioniLocation Name: Waxahachie Street Address: 112 ARABIAN RD Nearest Intersection: THOROUGHBRED Format of LatitudelLongitude: LatitudeiLongitude: Right of way where incident occurred: TDRF Page 2 of 3 Rev. ha and Texas Damage Reporting Form Submitted to RRC on Reference Incident Date: Countyz?LLl? Notification, Locating, Marking Was the One Call Center noti?ed prior to excavation? Excavator Downtime Did the excavator incur down time? Description of Damage Was there damage to a pipeline facility? Damage Occured To? Was there a release of product(blowing gas,hissing noise.odor,bubbles in water or ?uid leaking)? Did the excavator notify emergency Did the excavator notify the pipeline operator of damage through the noti?cation center? One Call Noti?cation Center? Dig Up ticket Number? Did the excavator notify the pipeline operator of damage directly? Did damage cause an interruption in service? If yes. duration of interruption of service(hours) Approx. how many customers were affected? Estimated cost of repair/restoration: Number of people injured: Type of injuries: Number fatalities: Underground Pipeline Information Company name of pipeline ATMOS ENERGY CORP.. MID-TEX DIV. operator? Type of underground pipeline Distribution facility affected? Pipeline is: Pipeline Material: Nominal Diameter of Damaged Pipe: What was the depth of the damaged pipeline at the point of contact? What Product was being transported Type of Product Transported? Natural or Other Gases Description of Root Cause Possible Cause: Additional Comments - Ngte: Your incident location may have been changed through our process of matching reports for the same incident. If this report was matched to this incident in enor, please contact us TDRF Page 3 of 3 Rev. TICKET IS 72426443 Ticket Number. I 572425443 Ticket: Source Portal Ticket Ts'pe: Normal . Hours Notice 47 Date 12:47 PM RESPONSE STATUS AS OF MONDAY. FEBRUARY 29, 20I6 8:26 AM CODE NAME FACILITIES COMPANY INFORMATION Circle Construction,inc Type. Excavator i 604 Taylor Bridge Court Richard Van Burleson Tx 76028 Weezel Contact Phone: (817) 937?7192 Phone 7) 295?0056 Contact Erna-I tvanweezelt?t?attmet ?b k_ 24 hours a da is ?ne Caller: Tricia Van Weezel a ac Caller Phone (317) 295-0056 Caller Ema-l tvanweezel@att.net WORK INFORMATION State TX Work Date. 831442015 12:00 County. ELLIS PM Place WAXAHACHIE Done For: 105 Arabian Street rd Deeper Than 16" True Thoroughbred Duration: one month Intersection? Street Underground ature ofWork . . Explosives False Utilities Map Book Whitelined. False DRIVING DIRECTIONS starting at 105 Arabian Rd. Please mark the street on the West side of the Cul de sac towards Saratoga Drive. Please continue to mark the entire length of Arabian Rd. REMARKS Work Date: PM 32.34795I, ?96.784678 5 CODE NAME At&t ASE Atmos Midtx WAX City of Waxahachie GWP Gateway Pipeline Company WXZ Oncor Electric Distribution Texas Dam age Reporting Form (TDRF) Document Key INSTRUCTIONS 8" s0? Enter TDRF into your Search Engine (examples: Google or Bing) Click on the Texas Damage Reporting Form link to enter into the RRC Online System. Click on the Enter a new Excavator Report link. Enter the Document Key listed on the ?rst page of this notice and click on Retrieve Report. Page One tab: Complete all remaining questions on this page. If the Excavator Contact Information is incorrect. click on the Excavator Contact button. Click the New Contact button if you are unable to search and select an Excavator contact on tile with the RRC. Enter your contact information under Excavator Detail and click on the Create button. Click on the Return to Report button. Click on Save Report button Click on Page Two tab; Complete all questions on this page and click on the Save Report button. Click on Page Three tab: Complete all questions on this page and click on the Save Report button. Once you have completed all of the questions. click on the Submit Completed Report button at the top of page three. Any missing answers or errors will be indicated in red. Once you have made the necessary corrections. click on the Save Report button and then click on the Submit Completed Report button again. You will now be able to print your con?rmation page by clicking on the Confinnation Report link. If you are not provided the option to click on the Con?rmation Report link. then your report is incomplete and has not been submitted. September 2011 I dc. [u RAILROAI a} 1298 AU .. hi RETURN SERVICE mag am}? will. 455-23 Egg-44348 HAW . ?3301?17 NAME [03 ., :ghxm - 1st Notice [7 33 f" 2nd Notice 7 METRO BORE 5 Return 10: NIXIE 759 c5 1 nausea: a; RETURN TO n4 UNCLAIMED UNABLE TO FORWARD 7511E32711 0935 6 56998>9999 MANUAL PRO: REQ . . :3 ?I'td 1hr: Iw??na?v?hl'u; 10:21:2015 Safety Measurement System Safely Measmem on! System - Overview (US. Carrier Registration (as of 9/23/2016, updated CARRIER REGISTRATION INFORMATION (MISS-150 DATE: 11/15/2015) Legal Name: RIGO YANEZ DBA Name: METROBORE US. 2825723 or Address: 102 FAIRMEADOWS DR DUNCANVILLE, TX 75116 Telephone: (469) 223-1261 Fax: Email: OPERATION CLASSIFICATION AUTHORIZED FOR HIRE PRIVATE PASSENGER, BUSINESS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INDIAN TRIBE CARGO CARRIED GENERAL FREIGHT MOTOR VEHICLES BUILDING MATERIALS FRESH PRODUCE PASSENGERS GRAIN, FEED, HAY GARBAGE, REFUSE, TRASH COMMODITIES DRY BULK PAPER PRODUCTS CONSTRUCTION Vehicle Miles Traveled: 132,000 VMT Year: 2014 Power Units: 1 DUNS Number: Drivers: 1 Carrier Operation: Interstate Passenger: No HM: No HHG: No New Entrant: No EXEMPT FOR HIRE PRIVATE PROPERTY PRIVATE PASSENGER, NON- MIGRANT BUSINESS U. S. MAIL STATE GOVERNMENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT OTHER HOUSEHOLD GOODS SHEETS, COILS, ROLLS DRIVE LOGS, POLES, BEAMS, LUMBER MOBILE HOMES MACHINERY, LARGE OBJECTS INTERMODAL CONTAINERS OIL FIELD EQUIPMENT LIVESTOCK COAL, COKE MEAT U.S. MAIL CHEMICALS REFRIGERATED FOOD BEVERAGES UTILITY FARM SUPPLIES WATER WELL OTHER Ha: .I?m csa .dot.govlSM SIC 1W21l2016 Safety Measurement Safety Measurement System - Overview (U.S. 2825723} System RIGO YAN EZ . . Safety Ratlng OOS Licensmg and Insurance DBA: METROBORE Rates (As of 10/20/2016 updated hourly u.s. oors: 2325723 (As of 10/20r2016 updated daily Address: 102 FAIRMEADOWS DR from SAFER) Active F0,_Hire Authority 75116 9 Yes NO Mm Number ofVehicles: 1 NM Rated rty I I Number of Drivers: 1 . ?3Pe '3 Number of Inspections: 0 0f service Rates Passenger No Type 005% NationalAvg% Goods No Vehicle 20.3 Broker No Driver 5.0 Hazmat 3.9 U.S. 2825723 is currently under an Out-of-Service order from FMCSA and shall not operate. Out-of- Service Reason: New Entrant Revoked - Refusal of Audit/No Contact. See how the proposed enhancements impact carrier results. Visit the SMS Preview Website BASIC Status (Public Property Carrier View) Behavior Analysis Safety Improvement Categories (BASICS) a ?0 Based on a 24-month record ending September 23, 2016 Not Public Not Public Hours-of- Controlled Hazardous Service Vehicle Substances Materials Unsafe Driving Crash Indicator Compliance Maintenance and Alcohol Compliance Driver Fitness Select a BASIC icon above to get details, or view your Com SMS Profile. Summary of Activities Carrier Registration Penalties History (Six years as of updated daily from FMCSAI The summary includes information Subject to General Threshold on the 5 most recent investigations and 24 months of inspections and crash history. No penalties found Most Recent Investigation: Total Inspections: 0 Total Inspections without Violations used in SMS: 0 Total Inspections with Violations used in SMS: 0 Total Crashes? :0 csa.dot.goviSM 1r? 10121r2016 Safety Measurement System - Overview (US. 2825723) ?Crashes listed represent a motor carrier?s involvement in reportable crashes, regardless of the carrier?s or driver?s role in the crash. Continue for details. USE OF SMS FAST Act of 2015: Readers should not draw conclusions about a carrier's overall safety condition simply based on the data di5played in this system. Unless a motor carrier has received an UNSATISFACTORY safety rating under part 385 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, or has otherwise been ordered to discontinue operations by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, it is authorized to operate on the Nation's roadways. Safety Measurement System: The data in the Safety Measurement System (SMS) is performance data used by the Agency and Enforcement Community. symbol, based on that data. indicates that FMCSA may prioritize a motor carrier for further monitoring. The symbol is not intended to imply any federal safety rating of the carrier pursuant to 49 USC 31144. Readers should not draw conclusions about a carrier's overall safety condition simply based on the data displayed in this system. Unless a motor carrier in the SMS has received an UNSATISFACTORY safety rating pursuant to 49 CFR Pa rt 385, or has otherwise been ordered to discontinue operations by the FMCSA, it is authorized to operate on the nation's roadways. Motor carrier safety ratings are available at and motor carrier licensing and insurance status are available at public.fmcsa.dot.gov?. dotgow'SMSIC arrieri2325723iOverviewaspx ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. INC - 104300 RAILROAD COMMISSION 63' TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION - Pipeline Damage Prevention TEXAS DAMAGE REPORTING FORM Please print (and retain) this page as a con?rmation of receipt of your Damage Report for the following incident: Incident 194999 Reference 159999-2 Date: 9912112915 County: Incident Information City/SubdivisionlLocation Waxahachie Street Name 112 ARABIAN RD Nearest Intersection THOROUGHBRED Latitude/Longitude Filer Information Company Name ATMOS ENERGY CORP.. MID-TEX DIV. Representative Name Mr. Jeffrey 8. Knights Street Address P. O. Box 223705 ?1 City, State Zip Dallas. TX 75222 3705 0 Phone (214) 206-2701 Email If you have any supporting documentation to submit for this report (such as a line locate ticket, color photos. maps, etc), or the Commission contacts you for additional information. use this page as a Fax or Mailing cover sheet to convey the documents, or email your information with the incident and reference number in the Subject line to: TDRFInfo@rrc.texas.gov. (Do Not FAX Photos) FAX this page as your cover sheet and Ma" 3 COPY Of this Page and any other any other documents to: 512-463-7153 documents t0: Railroad Commission of Texas Page 1 of Pipeline Damage Prevention PO. Box 12967 Austin, TX 78711-2967 If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact the Pipeline Damage Prevention section of the OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION at 512-475-0512. TDRF Rev. Texas Damage Reporting Form Submitted to RRC on Incident Reference #2 Incident Date: Who is submitting this information? StakeholderiSubmitter; Name of person providing the information: P5 Operator Information Operator P5 Number: Operator Full Name: Operator Address: Operator Address Line 2: City. State, Zip: Representative Name: Representative Phone: Excavator Contact Information Excavator Company Name: Excavator Address: City. State. Zip: Excavator Contact Name: Excavator Contact Phone Number: Excavator Contact Fax Number: Excavator Email Address: Gas Pipeline Monica Davidson (Online) 036589 ATMOS ENERGY CORP.. MID-TEX DIV. P. O. Box 223705 Dallas. TX 75222 3705 Mr. Jeffrey 3. Knights. Vice President. Technical Services (214) 206-2701 METRO BORE 102 FAIRMEADOW DR DUNCANVILLE, TX 75115 2711 RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ (469) 223?1261 RIGOYAN Other Contact Information (General Contractor) Company Name: Address: City. State. Zip: Contact Name: Contact Phone Number: Contact Fax Number: Email Address: Not Applicable Excavation Information Type of Excavator: Pipeline Damaged With: Type of Work Performed: Damaged by: Contractor Bonng Telecommunications Third Party Date and Location of Incident see RRC Note below) Date of Incident: State: County; City/SubdivisionlLocation Name: Street Address: Nearest Intersection: Format of Latitudei?Longitude: LatitudeiLongitude: Right of way where incident occurred: TDRF 09l2112015 8 :30 AM Texas (USA) ELLIS Waxahachie 112 ARABIAN RD THOROUGHBRED Dedicated Public Utility Easement Page 2 of 4 Rev. nu H?d a Texas Damage Reporting Form Submitted to RRC on 11/11/2015 Incident Reference 153606;; Incident Date: 09211291; Notification, Locating, Marking Was the One Call Center noti?ed prior to excavation? Yes Name of One Call Noti?cation Center? Texas 811 One Call Ticket Number? 1575144185 Date of Noti?cation: 09/08/2015 Did the excavator wait 48-hrs prior to excavating?: Unknown Did the pipeline operator provide a positive response to the ?rst Yes noti?cation?: Date of Positive Response: 09l19/2015 Time of Positive Response: 8 20 AM Did excavator make a second call to the One-Call Center?: Unknown Reason for call: If other. explain: Second Notice Ticket Number?: Date of Second Notice: Did the pipeline operator provide a positive response to the second Unknown noti?cation?: Date of Positive Response to second notice: Time of Positive Response to second notice: Were Pipeline facility marks visible in the area of excavation at the time of Yes damage? Were Pipeline facilities marked accurately? Yes If no.reason why? If other. explain? Distance of inaccurate marks from pipeline? What was type of locator?: Contract Locator If other. explain? If contracted, what was the name of the contracted locator? HEATH CONSULTANTS Method Used to Locate: Conductive If other. explain method: Was paint a type of marking used? Yes Were ?ags a type of marking used? Yes Was there another type of marking used? No If yes, describe: . Did the excavator mark site by "White Lining"? Unknown Were special instructions part of the locate ticket? Unknown Were maps used during marking? Yes Did Iocator meet with excavator at time of marking? Unknown Were pipeline company representatives on site at the time of excavation? No Did the Operator follow their Damage Prevention/Locating Procedure? Yes Excavator Downtime Did the excavator incur down time? Unknown Description of Damage Was there damage to a pipeline facility? Yes Damage Occured To? Body Of Pipe Was there a release of product(blowing gas.hissing Yes noise.odor,bubbles in water or ?uid leaking)? Did the excavator notify emergency services(911)? Unknown Did the excavator notify the pipeline operator of Unknown damage through the noti?cation center? One Call Noti?cation Center? Dig Up ticket Number? Did the excavator notify the pipeline operator of No damage directly? Did damage cause an interruption in service? Yes TDRF Page 3 of 4 REV. Texas Damage Reporting Form Submitted to RRC on 11/11/2015 lncident#: 104300 Reference IncidentDate: 9912112915 County: (data continued If yes, duration of interruption of service(hours) Unknown Approx. how many customers were affected? 17 Estimated cost of repair/restoration: Unknown Number of people injured: 0 Type of injuries: Number fatalities: 0 Was the type of pipeline damaged interstate or Intrastate intrastate? Did this incident or accident meet the Pipeline Safety Yes telephonic or written reportable criteria in Title 16 TX Admin. Code Chapter 8? Incident Call-in ID Number: 1129019 Impact of Incident Did ignition/?re occur? Yes Were people evacuated? Yes yes How many people were evacuated? Was there media coverage? Yes yes Were any streets blocked? Yes yes Was there any explosion? Yes yes Other impact? No Underground Pipeline Information Type of underground pipeline Distribution facility affected? Pipeline is: Active Pipeline Material: Polyethylene Plastic Nominal Diameter of Damaged 0.75 inches Pipe; What was the depth of the 2 ft 6.0 in damaged pipeline at the point of contact? Year Pipeline Installed: 2008 Was the pipeline facility part of a No joint trench? ls pipeline Operator a member of Yes One-Call Noti?cation Center? What Product was being tranSported Type of Product Transported? Natural or Other Gases Description of Root Cause Possible Cause: Failure to test-hole (pot-hole) Additional Comments The excavator operated mechanized equipment within the tolerance zone causing damage to a service line which resulted in the release of product. There was evidence that the excavator failed to verify the location of utility lines within the bore path through pot hole veri?cation. Ngfe: Your incident location may have been changed through our process of matching reports for the same incident. If this report was matched to this incident in error, please contact us at Inf v. TDRF Page 4 of 4 Rev. Texas Damage Reporting Form Submitted to RRC on 11/11/2015 Incidental: Reference 153695;; Incident Date: County: Who is submitting information? Stakeholder/Submitter: Name of person providing the information: P5 Operator Information Operator P5 Number: Operator Full Name: Operator Address: Operator Address Line 2: City. State. Zip: Representative Name: Representative Phone: Gas Pipeline Monica Davidson (Online) 036589 ATMOS ENERGY CORP.. DIV. P. O. Box 223705 Dallas. TX 75222 3705 Mr. Jeffrey 8. Knights. Vice President. Technical Services (214) 206-2701 Excavator Contact Information Excavator Company Name: Excavator Address: City. State. Zip: Excavator Contact Name: Excavator Contact Phone Number: Excavator Contact Fax Number: Excavator Email Address: METRO BORE 102 FAIRMEADOW DR DUNCANVILLE: TX 75116 2711 RIGO YANEZ OR ADAN YANEZ (469) 223-1261 RIGOYAN Other Contact Information (General Contractor) Company Name: Address: City, State. Zip: Contact Name: Contact Phone Number: Contact Fax Number: Email Address: Not Applicable Excavation Information Type of Excavator: Pipeline Damaged With: Type of Work Performed: Damaged by: Contractor Bonng Telecommunications Third Party Date and Location of Incident see RRC Note below) Date of Incident: State: County: CitylSubdivisionlLocation Name: Street Address: Nearest Intersection: Format of LatitudefLongitude: LatitudeiLongitude: Right of way where incident occurred: TDRF 09l21/2015 8:30 AM Texas (USA) ELLIS Waxahachie 112 ARABIAN RD THOROUGHBRED Dedicated Public Utility Easement Page 2 of 4 Rev. ?l Texas Damage Reporting Forr. Submitted to RRC on 11/11/2015 Incident #401390 Reference incident Date: 09121201; Notification, Locating, Marking Was the One Call Center noti?ed prior to excavation? Yes Name of One Call Noti?cation Center? Texas 811 One Call Ticket Number? 1575144185 Date of Noti?cation: 09/08/2015 Did the excavator wait 48-hrs prior to excavating?: Unknown Did the pipeline operator provide a positive response to the ?rst Yes noti?cation?: Date of Positive Response: 09l19/2015 Time of Positive Response: 8 20 AM Did excavator make a second call to the One-Call Center?: Unknown Reason for call: If other, explain: Second Notice Ticket Number?: Date of Second Notice: Did the pipeline operator provide a positive response to the second Unknown noti?cation?: Date of Positive Response to second notice: Time of Positive Response to second notice: Were Pipeline facility marks visible in the area of excavation at the time of Yes damage? Were Pipeline facilities marked accurately? Yes If no.reason why? If other. explain? Distance of inaccurate marks from pipeline? What was type of locator?: Contract Locator if other. explain? If contracted, what was the name of the contracted locator? HEATH CONSULTANTS Method Used to Locate: Conductive if other. explain method: Was paint a type of marking used? Yes Were ?ags a type of marking used? Yes Was there another type of marking used? No if yes, describe: Did the excavator mark site by "White Lining"? Unknown Were special instructions part of the locate ticket? Unknown Were maps used during marking? Yes Did locator meet with excavator at time of marking? Unknown Were pipeline company representatives on site at the time of excavation? No Did the Operator follow their Damage Prevention/Locating Procedure? Yes Excavator Downtime Did the excavator incur down time? Unknown Description of Damage Was there damage to a pipeline facility? Yes Damage Occured To? Body Of Pipe Was there a release of product(b owing gas.hissing Yes noise.odor.bubbles in water or ?uid leaking)? Did the excavator notify emergency services(911)? Unknown Did the excavator notify the pipeline operator of Unknown damage through the noti?cation center? One Call Noti?cation Center? Dig Up ticket Number? Did the excavator notify the pipeline operator of No damage directly? Did damage cause an interruption in service? Yes T.DRF Page 3 of 4 I Texas Damage Reporting Forr. Submitted to RRC on 11/11/2015 Incident M90 Reference #:4516061 Incident Date: (data continued If yes. duration of interruption of service(hours) Unknown Approx. how many customers were affected? 17 Estimated cost of repair/restoration: Unknown Number of people injured: 0 Type of injuries: Number fatalities: 0 Was the type of pipeline damaged interstate or intrastate intrastate? Did this incident or accident meet the Pipeline Safety Yes telephonic or written reportable criteria in Title 16 TX Admin. Code Chapter 8? Incident Call-in ID Number: 1129019 Impact of Incident Did ignition/?re occur? Yes Were people evacuated? Yes yes How many people were evacuated? Was there media coverage? Yes yes Were any streets blocked? Yes yes Was there any explosion? Yes yes Other impact? No Underground Pipeline Information Type of underground pipeline Distribution facility affected? Pipeline is: Active Pipeline Material: Polyethylene Plastic Nominal Diameter of Damaged 0.75 inches Pipe: What was the depth of the 2 ft 6.0 in damaged pipeline at the point of contact? Year Pipeline Installed: 2008 Was the pipeline facility part of a No joint trench? Is pipeline Operator a member of Yes One-Call Noti?cation Center? What Product was being transported Type of Product Transported? Natural or Other Gases Description of Root Cause Possible Cause: Failure to test-hole (pot-hole) Additional Comments The excavator operated mechanized equipment within the tolerance zone causing damage to a service line which resulted in the release of product. There was evidence that the excavator failed to verify the location of utility lines within the bore path through pot hole veri?cation. Note: Your incident location may have been changed through our process of matching reports for the same incident. If this report was matched to this incident in error, please contact us atT . v. Page 4 of 4 Rf?: $13105 116 1? February 8? 2016 Jeff Knights Vice President, Technical Services Mr. David Ferguson Mud-Tex Division Damage Prevention Oversight and Safety Division Railroad Commission of Texas 1701 N. Congress Ave., 9'll Floor Austin, Texas 78701 Re: Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847: Violation of Commission Rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, 16 71.4.0. and 18.8(a) at 112 Arabian Road (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Eilis County, Texas on September 21, 2015 Dear Mr. Ferguson: The purpose of this letter is to respond to the letter from the Damage Prevention Section dated January 1 1, 2016, with regard to the above-noted docket. First, I want you to know that, while Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division (?Atmos Energy? or ?Company?) does not admit fault regarding the alleged violation of 16 T.A.C. Sections 18.5(a) and the Company is willing to informally settle this matter by paying an administrative penalty of $1,750.00 and signing the Consent Order attached hereto. The Company does not believe that the recommended enhancement of $75,000.00 is warranted and respectfully requests that the Damage Prevention Staff reconsider that recommendation after examining the additional facts set forth in this letter. This information makes clear that the proposed enhancement penalty is not warranted. Summing As demonstrated in the documentation accompanying this correspondence, the excavator has acknowledged that the preexisting line locate marks and ?ags were suf?cient to allow him to hand dig and uncover the Atmos Energy service line that his directional boring machine would later sever, causing the leak that resulted in the subject incident. The transcribed statement of the excavator establishes that the incident, which gave rise to the alleged violations, was not the result of any action or inaction on the part of Atmos Energy. Therefore, the proposed enhancement penalty cannot bejusti?ed. Detailed Explanation On August 22, 2015, in response to a line locate request from Circle Construction, Inc. (?Circle Heath Consultants (?Heath?) located, marked and ?agged the Atmos Energy natural gas pipelines on Arabian Road in the Saddle Brook subdivision (?Saddle Brook?) in Waxahachie, Texas, including the service line to 1 12 Arabian Road, the site of the incident that is the subject of the above?referenced Damage Prevention proceeding. had contracted with Circle to install fiber optic cable in the Saddle Brook subdivision. Circle L, in turn, hired Metro Bore as a subcontractor to assist in the installation. Metro Bore began work in Saddle Brook on approximately September 7, 2015. On the morning of September 17, 2015, Rigo Yanez, the owner of Metro Bore, and his two man crew arrived at Arabian Road. Theirjob that day was to use a directional boring machine to install ?ber optic cable along the west side of Arabian Road, south of its intersection with Thoroughbred Street. Atmos Energy Corporation P. O. Box 223705. Dallas, Texas 75222-3705 214-206-2701 214-206-2126 According to Mr. Yanez, the ?rst thing Mr. Yanez and his crew did that morning was to conduct a walk- through along Arabian Street in order to identify any underground facilities that would be crossing, or running perpendicular to, the route of the ?ber optic cable. Utilizing the locate ?ags and marks made by Heath on August 22, 2015, Mr. Yanez and his crew identi?ed each Atmos Energy service line by hand digging next to the sidewalk along the west side of Arabian Road. They also determined the depth of each of the service lines in order to be able to bore beneath them. In addition to identifying the location and depth of each natural gas service line, Mr. Yanez and his crew also identi?ed the location and depth of each sewer line. Following this exercise, Mr. Yanez determined that the ?safe zone? for his bore was four feet, which he calculated would be below the natural gas service lines and above the sewer lines. Mr. Yanez and his crew then began to bore, starting, as noted above, on the west side of Arabian Road, south of its intersection with Thoroughbred Street. The crossings they bored included the Atmos Energy service line at 1 12 Arabian Road, at which point the drill head of the machine severed both the service line and sewer line. They continued working until 4:30 or 5:00 that afternoon when they stopped in front of 107 Arabian Road. The above-stated facts are supported by the interview of Rigo Yanez conducted on September 23, 2015, by Rick Womack of Priority 1 Fire Investigators. A transcribed copy of that interview is attached hereto. The ?rst photos from the scene corroborate the observations of Mr. Yanez regarding the existence of line locate marks: they show the distinct presence of the line locate mark in the street that Mr. Yanez acknowledges that he saw and interpreted to locate the gas line. Conclusion The purpose of 16 T.A.C. Sections 18.5(a) and 18.8(a) is to require operators to timely and accurately mark the location of their underground pipelines so that an excavator will be able avoid damage to the pipelines in the course of performing its work. 16 T.A.C. Section 18.126) and allow the Commission to assess an enhancement to a penalty for violations that involve death or personal injury. Therefore, in order for the Commission to enhance a penalty, the underlying violation must in some way contribute to or cause a death or personal injury. With regard to this incident, the alleged violations of 16 T.A.C. Sections 18.5(a) and 18.8(a) by Atmos Energy did not contribute in any way to the unfortunate incident that occurred at 1 13 Arabian Road because of the preexisting locate marks that Heath made on August 22, 2015. Rigo Yanez, the excavator that severed the Atmos Energy service line at this location, acknowledged that the preexisting marks were sufficient to allow him to hand dig and uncover those facilities prior to beginning his work. Since the alleged violations did not contribute to or cause a death or personal injury, an enhancement of the penalty is not warranted under 16 T.A.C. Section 18.120). The cause of the damage was the failure of the excavator to keep the pothole open to observe the drill bit of the directional bore pass the gas service line without causing damage. In essence, due to the manner in which the excavator operated his directional bore machine, this incident would have occurred regardless of how the gas line was marked. Furthermore, if the pothole had been open when the drill bit severed the service line, escaping gas would have likely vented into the atmosphere rather than migrating into the sewer line. For these reasons, Atmos Energy requests that the proposed enhancement penalty be withdrawn and that this matter be administratively settled for $1,750.00. If this is acceptable, please forward a revised Agreed Order to me for the Company?s signature. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, M17 KM Je?'rey S. Knights Attachments Page 1 MR. WOMACK: My name is Rick Womack. I'm with Priority 1 Fire Investigations. I'm in Duncanville, Texas on September the 23rd, 2015. Time is 12:45 p.m. I'm in the process of interviewing Mr. Rigo -- Rigo Yanez, Y-a-n-e-z. He is the owner of Metro Boring Company. Q. Sir, would you please state your full name? A. Yes. Rigo Yanez. Q. And spell your first and last name. A. R-i-g-o. Last name Y?a?n?e?z. Q. Rigo, would you would you state your date of birth? A. Yes. It's April 24, 1986. Q. Okay. And how long have you lived in this area? A. We've been in this area since 1995, March. Q. Okay. And how are you presently employed? I'm self-employed. And what's the name of your company? A. Metro Bore. Okay. And what what does that company do? A We do directional drilling for contractors, like for fiber optic cable. Q. Okay. So you work for other people who hire you to install underground communication lines? Page 2 A. Yes, sir, that is correct. Q. Okay. And what's your background? A. We're working right now with Circle L. I have eight years, going on nine years, of experience of all this. We are real experienced in everything that we do. I mean, that's why we're in this business. And I want to be accepted through any general contractor. As for one, Circle is one. If we don't know what we're doing, he would have some caution to me. Q. Have you worked for other subcontractors before? A. Yes, I have. Q. Can you name a few of them? R, Blue Streak and A. Yes. Metro Pool, Silas White. Q. Okay. And that's all local? A. Yes, sir, all local. Q. Okay. And presently, who are you working for, subbing under? A. Circle Construction. Q. Okay. And that's Circle sir. Yes, And who is the owner of Circle Construction? :13 :0 Mr. Rick Van Weezel. Rick Van Weezel? Page 3 A. Yes, sir. Q. And previously you gave me his phone number of 817?937-7192; is that correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And how long have you subbed under Circle A. Since last year, going on two years. Q. So you are going on two years then. During that two?year period, have you -- you continued to install underground utilities? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And during that two?year period, I think you told me once that you had a -- that you cut into a -- some type of a communication cable? A. Yes. Q. Other than that, have you had any other problems? A. No, sir, not at all. Q. Okay. So let's talk about the the explosion that occurred in I believe it's called the Saddlebrook addition? A. Yes. Which is on the 100 block of Arabian Road? A. Correct. Now, then, how long had you been working in Page 4 that area? A. Since two weeks ago. Around the start date of September 7th through -- up until September 17th. Q. Okay. All right. Now, then, where did you get your -- who gave you the assignment to go out there? A. Circle L. Q. Circle L. Okay. Now, what do you do before you start your process of doing the underground boring? A. We're required to call for all line locates. Q. Okay. And in this situation, you did that, correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you had provided me with an 811 call before you did, a ticket number of 1575144185; is that correct? A. Yes, sir, that's correct. Q. And you also provided me a copy of the e?mail that confirmed that ticket number? A. Yes, sir, correct. Q. Okay. And this was done prior to you doing any boring? A. Yes, correct. Q. Okay. Now, you originally started in the Saddlebrook subdivision out there in the streets of 'Page 5 Citation and Secretariat? A. Q. That's correct. And then you wound back around and you're going down to the Arabian Road? A. Q. That's correct. Okay. Had you had any problems on Citation or Secretariat streets? A. Q. A. Q. Secretariat on Wednesday, Not at all. Okay. Everything was working fine? Yes, sir. Okay. Now, then, you finished up Citation and September the 16th? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you had started that job on the 7th of September? A. Yes. Q. So Thursday morning, you moved locations to the street where the explosion occurred? A. Q. At Q. Yes. And we started that morning at about what time? We arrived there about 8:00, 8:30. And you started at the intersection there? Thoroughbred and Arabian Road. Okay. Now, tell me a little bit about your process of how you start that morning. Page 6 A. Well, we start, we take a walk-through of the whole location we're about to bore underneath. We take a look at all the crossings and what is running against parallel. And we decide exactly where to borehole it, if it's necessary. In this case it was it's each gas crossing. And we needed to borehole the gas crossing and we did. And we went on with our day and continued, started drilling. Q. Now, tell -- tell me what the sidewalk and street looked like. I know there's we've talked about some -- some flags and some markings. A. Uh-huh. Q. What -- what type of flags did we have laid out and what was the spray paint markings on the sidewalk? A. I've seen yellow flags, which it indicates the gas. And I seen the orange flags that indicates the telecommunications. Q. Okay. Now, then, who made these marks? A. USIC and Heath Consultants. Q. And Heath Consultants, it's their responsibility to come out and mark the underground utilities? A. Yes, that's correct. The underground utilities on gas only. Q. Only on gas? Page 7 A. That's only on gas. Q. Okay. like a Now, you had showed me a plat, survey, that you had that shows that area of and who who -- you've got the plat. Now, who did you get that from? A. Circle Construction. Q. Circle Construction? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. Do you know who they acquired it from? A which they acquired it from a main general engineer who makes those. Q. Okay. So it's your understanding that who is the end customer here? Who are you doing this for? A. For the customer, sir, around the neighborhood. But you are installing what type of a cable? A. Fiber optic cable. And that cable belongs to who? A All right. So had supplied Q. Okay. Circle with a survey plat showing the streets and -- and certain markings on this plat? A. Yes, sir. Q. And that's what you provided me and I photographed that with my iPad, correct? A. Yes. Page 8 Q. Okay. So when you when you start your Thursday morning excavation, everything has been marked that should be marked? A. Yes. Q. To the best of your knowledge? A. To the best of my knowledge, yes. Q. Okay. And we had -- you had educated me a little bit that when they mark, they use a certain color spray paint and a certain color flag? A. Yes. Q. And that both paint and flag is used and is required to be used to mark utilities? A. Yes. Q. You told me that the color orange is telecommunication; the color red is electrical; the color yellow is for gas; the color blue is for water; the color green is for sewer. And if it's a white flag, it's like an all clear; there's no utilities in that area? A. Yes. Q. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, when you started that morning, what what colors were present? A. Just only orange and yellow. Page 9 Q. Orange and yellow? A. Yes. Q. Orange being telecommunications? A. Yes. Q. And yellow being gas? A. Yes. Q. Why not blue and green and red? A. The red was there as well, I'm sorry. Red, yellow and orange. The blue and the green, flags of it indicating anything on there. Q. Okay. So they had marked red for electrical? A. Yes. Q. And yellow for gas? A. Yes. Q. And orange for telecommunications? A. Telecommunications. Yes, that's correct. Q. Okay. Now -- and it's also marked with spray paint. So where is the spray paint located? A. Usually right underneath, it's supposed to be It's supposed to be right underneath the six?inch line that they have underneath the ground. Q. So they would -- somebody found the utility. Say say let's talk about electrical in this deal. they there is a power line underground, they scope it, find it and they -- they apply some a -- there was no If Page 10 A. Red paint. Q. A red marking? A. Yes. Q. If it's on concrete or a sidewalk? A. Yes. Or in grass. Q. And on grass. And then they also flag a red flag? A. Correct. Q. Now, they can't put red flags in concrete, right? A. No. Q. So the red flags are only in the dirt or the grass? A. Grass, yes, sir. Okay. And they all should pretty well line up? A Yes, they should. Q. Whatever utility is that's marked? A On the ground, yes. Q. Okay. So this day, we had we had the red electrical. And you walked down there and surveyed that area? A. Yes. Q. Did all that appear to be correct to you? A. It should have been, yes, it should. Q. Okay. Now, then, when you see red markings and Page 11 when you see orange markings and when you see yellow markings, does that tell you then that there's no that's all the utilities you need to worry about? A. It tells me what's right there and underneath the ground and the direction that I am about to bore, yes. Q. Okay. But what about the utilities that's not marked, like the water and the sewer? A. Normally, we have to call those in, too, but in this case we did call it in. And if they're not marked, we give ourselves an idea that where everything stands. Q. Okay. So they weren't marked in this case. Do you know why they weren't marked? A. I don't. They had by that time, they had more than two weeks, enough to mark those already. Q. Okay. And that was the 811 call before you dig? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So the water wasn't marked and the sewer wasn't marked. That was the only two that wasn't marked? A. Yes. Q. So but your experience tells you, hey, more than likely, we have water or sewer nearby? Page 12 A. By the water meters and by the sewer cleanouts, yes. Q. Right. Okay. So that morning when you started, even though there's some things that's marked and some things that are not marked, you have -- it's still your responsibility to locate these items? A. Yes. 0- Okay. So how do you go about doing locating -- before you start your excavation, how do you find and locate these utilities? Because they're when they mark them, previously marked them, they didn't put a depth that they're so far underground; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. So you have to figure that out yourself, right? A. We have yes. In this case, when it's just a water meter, we know that for one, that the water meter depth is going to be around a foot, a foot?and-a-half, which is the service line that goes to the house. And we open those water meters up and we will be able to tell exactly how deep is that service line going to the house. Then the sewer cleanout, they have to have one in the front of the house or the side of the house. In this case, they had one in the front. And then they Page 13 have the second sewer cleanout close by the sidewalk, which we opened that, and gave ourselves an estimate exactly the depth and -- and the destination it was going. Q. Okay. All right. So you have a general idea? A. Yes. Q. Is there a code or a standard that -- that is applied to the depth of all utilities? A. Yes. Q. And what is that depth? A. Thirty?six inches. Q. So you know that when you start, that everything should be below 36 inches? A. It should be at least, bare minimum, 36 inches and below, yes. Q. Okay. All right. So that morning when you started, you located your you located your gas lines? .A. Yes. Q. And how do you locate a gas line? A. In this matter, we did it by sharpshooter and a shovel. Q. Okay. Do you have an idea where to start? A. Yes. We take our measurement at where is the last marker of the gas to where it connects to the main gas. And we get ourself aware of the direction of where Page 14 they'll be drilling to and we pothole right next or sometimes they're right on top of the gas markings. Q. Okay. Now, tell me what a pothole is. A. A pothole is when you dig underneath to find the existing line that's buried underground. Q. Okay. Now, then, what do you use to dig that hole with? A. We in this case, we used a sharpshooter and a shovel. Q. Okay. So you just try not to destroy the grass too much, you are very cautious, you dig a small hole and that's all the way down to where you locate A. And expose the six-inch line Q. Okay. A. yes. Q. And then how do you know to verify if it's a gas line, what color is it? A. It's yellow. Q. A gas line is yellow itself? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And so that gives you confirmation that you are on the right line? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And did you do that where it indicated each gas line was? Page 15 A. Yes. Q. Okay. And did you do that at each electrical crossing? A. I believe we didn't have electrical cross it was just gas crossings that we had. We did two to three potholes that we had there. Q. Okay. So you only did potholes for the gas lines A. Yes. Q. correct? A. Yes. Q. So what about sewer, how did you determination -- determine about the sewer lines, if they was correct? A. The sewer by the cleanout is normally located at the edge of the property from near slopes down into six feet. And since it was the edge of the property before we started on the sidewalk, since we were going to be drilling underneath the sidewalk, that gave our clearance, knowing that this this is where the sewer is at. And we stayed a certain distance from it so we work we can avoid damaging anything that's near there. this sewer cleanout you are Q. Right. Now, talking about that's a reference that you use, is it on Page 16 the house side of the sidewalk? A. Yes. Q. And about how far off of the sidewalk is it located? A. I think about I think in that certain house, I think it was about a foot or two off the sidewalk. Q. Okay. So if you are standing on a sidewalk. you are looking at the house, then the cleanout is just a foot or two off the sidewalk? A. Yes. And is that the same area you also dig Q. Okay. your potholes in, is on that side of the sidewalk? A. Yes. The house side of the sidewalk? A. Yes. And when you dig a pothole, is it right just -- I mean, just right next to the sidewalk? A. It is right next to the sidewalk, yes. I try to be as close as we can to the sidewalk so we don't get too far into the people's property and damaging any drop line that they might have or damaging anything else, any things they have underneath going to their house, yes. Q. Because you have to worry about like They like to A. People's grass. for instance. take care of their property. Page 17 Q. If they have a sprinkler system? A. Sprinkler system as well. Q. Underwater pipes -- underground pipes and stuff like that? A. Yes. Yes, sir. Q. Did you -- did you observe or run into any sprinkler systems when you was doing it that day? A. No, sir. Q. Okay. So the gas line that we had previously talked about this morning in our interview that has been reported that your machine had -- had hit -- A. Yes. Q. you had -- you know for a fact that you had dug a pothole? A. Yes. Q. Dug down and had confirmation the depth of it and the location of it? A. Yes. Q. Now, did you do that personally? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Did anybody help you do that? A. Yes. Who helped you? 35 l0 Adan and Juan. let's kind of back up just a little bit. :0 Now, Thursday, have them employees. A. Yes. How A-d-a-n. Yes . Okay. Juan? Yesname? if not, Adan Yanez. Last name Yanez, He's my brother. Juan Moreno. And his last name, A. M?o?r?e-n-o. Q. Okay. 469-647-2348 for him? A. Yes. Q. Thank you. that day? A. Yes. Q. Now, employee working, Now, correct? give me the name and phone numbers, then, Page 18 if you I can give them to you of your do you spell his first name? Y?a-n-e-z. And how is he related to you? And is his phone number 214?900-4937? And who is the other employees? how do you spell his last And you provided a phone number of so that's your crew for you normally have an extra or another Page 19 A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, having three employees, counting yourself, instead of four, does that does that just make for a longer day and it goes a little bit slower? Does that have any drawbacks to having less employees that day? A. No. Q. Okay. Now, then, you've laid out your survey. You know where you're going to do your boring. You've located you dug your potholes. You know where all the crossings are for gas. A. Yes. Q. Okay. Did was any of them at a different location than what was noted on the either spray paint or by the flags? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And when you say "yes," what do you mean by that? A. The gas mark, the last time I seen, it indicated was stopped in the curb. It did not continue on the sidewalk. It did not continue on the grass -- grass. Then the prior to going towards the house, the main gas was located, but in between the section I just named wasn't. And I gave myself an Page 20 estimated way to does a straight dig down there and that's how I exposed it. Q. Now, are you talking about the one where -- that was possibly damaged -- A. Yes. The one that you showed Q. -- in your bore? pictures of me here? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So it was not marked properly? A. Yes. Q. So -- so did you where it was originally marked A. Yes. Q. you dug down and couldn't find all that -- A. I found it about a foot?and?a?half away from. where I last seen the mark on the curb. Q. So my question. though, is where it was marked on the concrete and on the grass -- or was it marked on the concrete and grass? A. It was marked on the concrete and stopped in the curb. Not on the sidewalk. Q. Okay. So it was on the curb side of the street? A. Yes. Q. But there was no line across the sidewalk? LON Page 21 A. Yes. Or in the grass to show the location? A. Yes. So how -- how did you find it? Did you dig? A I dig for it. Because I give myself an extra -- based on my experience and everything, it's going all across the street marked and it stopped right there on the curb. I kind of give myself an estimate that it's going straight across up into the main, and that's how I found it a foot away, a foot?and?a?half away from where the I gave myself the estimate where I thought it was going to be. Q. Okay. So the mark, the original mark was in the wrong location? A. Yes. Q. And was it north or south, as you are going north A. Okay. Q. -- I mean, you're going south with your boring? A. Okay. So it was a little bit more south. Q. So it was further down the street? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So it was past the mark that they had made? Page 22 A. Yes. Q. Okay. All right. Is that unusual? A. No. Q. Okay. So you you gained experience in finding and locating underground utilities when they're not properly marked? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, when you dug down and found it, how do you know that it's how do you know the depth of the line? A. We make we take a tape measure and we measure it. Q. And do you note that on anything A. Yes. Q. -- the measurement? What do you note it on? A. On a daily bore log that we use. Q. Okay. So do you take it and just write it down? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Do you also note it on your on the sidewalk or anything? A. Yes, we also note it on the sidewalk, every 20 feet, we note it exactly our depth and where we're it indicates going. And we dot, exactly every 10 feet, where exactly our pipe is going to be found for future Page 23 reference. Q. Okay. So do you recall what depth that was right next to the -- where you -- A. Yes. Q. -- dug down? A. Between four and four and a half. Q. I'm sorry? A Between four feet. four and a half feet. Q. So right next to your sidewalk that faces the house, you dug down and found it and it's between four feet -- A. Just our in a dug. The gas we found between three feet maybe; three feet. Q. What did you find between four feet, four and a half feet? A. That's our that's our indicating that the locator showed us, that was our depth for our drill head that was going through there at that time. Q. No okay. But I misunderstood you. A. Okay. Q. But I'm talking about the pothole. A. Oh, the pothole. Yes. When you dig it 11? :0 Okay. IO -- and you find your yellow gas line 11310 Page 24 Yes. and you measure it with your tape measure Yes. is that measurement wrote in a -- Paper. on the sidewalk or where is it wrote at? It's wrote on my bore log. I keep those logged in my bore log. Q. A. Q. Your bore log? Yes. Is it wrote right then so that you know exactly what should have been wrote right then, yes. Okay. But you say "it should have been"? Uh-huh. Was it, though? No. It wasn't wrote? I didn't have time to, because I was continuing to do the next pothole as well. Q. Okayyou remember that measurement? A. Q. Yes, I remember the measure. What was that measurement? 33 inches. Page 25 33? A Yes. Q. So 33 is above 36? A Yes, correct. Q. So their gas line wasn't as deep as -- it wasn't below 36 inches? A. Yes. Q. The standard requirement? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Did that have any concern? A. Yes, it did. All right. And how did that concern you? That it's too shallow. It's too shallow and 350 then if we don't go our depth, we can possibly hit it. And that's why we chose to go around three feet I mean, go four feet, bore underneath everything four feet. let me ask you a question I Q. Okay. Now, then, should have asked you earlier. What is your objective when you are boring; do you go above the lines or below the lines? A. Below the lines. Q. Is that a preference? Is that standard? A. It's the preference and standard that you should always avoid anything that's above. Page 26 Q. So the safe zone is :15 Is below? A. Correct. And so when you when you locate a gas line at 33 feet -- A. Inches. Inches. Q. I mean, I'm sorry, 33 inches A. Yes. Q. -- how do you set your safety zone that you are going to bore in? A. We set it by going underneath that existing line. Q. Okay. So if you're if you find the gas line at 33 inches, what's your depth your depth that you feel safe with on boring? A. On boring, my safe is between four and four and a half feet. Q. Okay. So is that is that your depth that you bored at that Thursday morning? A. Yes. if Q. So at the gas line crossing, you measured it on the inside of the sidewalk at 33 inches? A. Uh?huh. Q. And so you knew -- you knew that you had to go Page 27 at least how many inches or feet below the top of the ground? A. Yes. Q. So how many feet or inches was that? A. In inches that we drill to the ground was between 40 something inches that we found it in. Q. So you said earlier at least four feet in, four feet? A. Yes. Q. So that's 48 inches? A. Yeshard to keep your bore bit at a certain level, a certain depth? A. It's not hard at all if we you're drilling in dirt. We like to keep it stable in a zero degree. Easily every single feet it moves, but it can only move a certain percentage. It never passes over into a seven four to six percentage. That, to -- that, to me, is already extreme much. So we always try to keep it at a zero percent so we can keep it at a straight bore so we can always avoid any damage. Q. Okay. So once you dig your potholes and you found the depth of the gas lines, you know that you have to be 48 inches or lower? That's your safe zone; is Page 28 that right? A. Uh-huh, yes. Q. That's your objective, is to be 48 inches or lower to miss the utilities? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So I guess in -- there's some way you set your machine up and with the guy that's guiding it, the locator, all of that's communication back and forth? A. Yes. Q. And so you know what your your constant depth is, you know that by running the machine? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, then, what about the sewer lines; how do you locate the sewer lines? A. We pop open the two screws that the metal lids have for the sewer lines. Q. Now, when the -- you pop open what? A. The metal lids that the sewer cleanout has for us to dictate this is the sewer cleanout. And we measure get out our tape measure and we measure all the way down to know exactly what's the depth of that sewer line so we can avoid it, either going east of it or west of it or going north or south of it. then, is a sewer line cleanout just Q. Okay. Now, right adjacent to the side of the sidewalk? Page 29 A. Yes. Q. Okay. So now, sewer lines, they're -- they run downhill to the main just so we have gravity flow of the sewage? A. It goes -- yes. Q. So do you take that into consideration that it is at an angle? A. Yes. Q. And you build that angle factor into your depth? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, in this case, you've seen a picture and of your where your bore machine went through 75 percent of the top portion of a four?inch sewer line? A. Yes. Q. Now, then, my question is, why -- why do you think that happened? A. It was partly we don't know. It was partly one of the angles it was going in a slope down, that it didn't slope down immediately. It was one of the ones that had just sloped down very slowly and we caught it in between. Q. So do you think it was below the 48 inches? A. There's no telling. Q. I thought you were at 48 inches. Page 30 Yes. Right? Yes. So at at 48 inches, it would mean that it was sloping down for you to hit? A. Depending how much of a degree angle it was going, yes. Q. Okay. If it had been running straight across, you wouldn't have hit it? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. You would have went under it? Yes. Oh, yeah, definitely. Okay. Now, you measured each pothole for each gas line and you factored all that in and you factored all your sewer lines in, and you felt like by being at 48 inches, that was your safe zone? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. To stay below 48 inches? Yes. And where how do you measure 48 inches? Is that from the top of the concrete, the top of the ground? A. Yeah, top of the concrete. The locator itself tells you exactly how deep you are from that, where you're at. Page 31 Q. And the locator is your brother and he is walking in front of the machine. A. Uh-huh. Q. And he has a communication device that's communicating with the drilling head of the bore machine, and his readout on his device is telling him what? A. What's his depth, as soon as he pushed the button, to find out his depth. Q. Okay. Now, does he control the depth up there? Does he guide it or is that something you do? A. He guides it. Q. Okay. He guides and he has the ability to raise it or lower it? A. Yes. Q. Or to turn it directionally or whatever? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you are on the bore machine? A. Yes. Q. And what are you doing on the bore machine? A. I'm seeing everything from where exactly he is standing at. Q. Okayyou've run the machine enough in your in your job occupation that you know if you hit something, that Page 32 A. I feel it. Q. there is a reaction? A. Yes. Q. So tell me about how -- how sensitive this is. A It's real sensitive. Whenever you drill a course, the drill stem goes in circles. And there is a certain speed that I put the at to whenever we're about to cross something, we lower it down. So when the drill stem is still going in circles and we catch anything in the ground, that drill stem will not go the same speed I want it to because we had caught or hit or damaged anything. In this case, as I didn't feel no difference, we continued doing the same thing that we do every day. Q. Okay. Now, in the past when you for instance, you told me about hitting that underground How did that feel? communication line. What happened then when you hit that? A. Oh, okay. The drill stem turns again in a circle towards the right?hand side, first going into a circle clockwise. So when we hit that telecommunication awhile back, it slowed me down. I couldn't turn the head as fast as I could. I knew something was wrapped up because I Page 33 felt it tear off immediately. And we stopped. Q. And when you say you couldn't turn the head, but the machine is turning the head, so does your machine kind of load up like it's under A. It slows -- it slows down. Q. It slows down. You can see it's binding? A. Yeahcan feel it's binding, yes. Q. When you say you feel it, are you actually having your hands on the machine? A. I have the two handles of the machine, which one pushes it forward and the -- the right handle pushes the drill stem forward. The left handle makes it go -- drilling from left to right. Q. So you have one that controls the forward motion and the other one controls the speed of the bit? A. Yes. Q. The rotation A. Yes. Q. speed A. Yes. Q. of the bit? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So you can feel that if one if it hits something dead on, it quits going forward? Page 34 A. It -- Q. It takes backup for about -- A. I have a backup pressure and the speed of it going in rotation is not the same. Q. Yeah. And then, also, say you're going fine forward but if it wraps up into something, you feel it bogging down A. Oh, definitely. Q. the rotation speed? A. Oh, definitely. Yes, definitely. Q. Okay. So you have got a very good sense of what the drill is doing and what what the drill is in contact with? A. Yes. there Q. All right. So when you drilled that day, was that Thursday, you never felt anything that would give you an indication that something that you bumped into something or glanced off of something or went through something? A. Yes. Q. Okay. All right. Now, then, your brother that's running the -- A. Locator. Q. -- locator, did when y'all started out, did you tell him what depth to keep it? Page 35 Yes. And what did you tell him? I told him to keep it all the way between four to four and a half feet. Q. 48 inches down to 52 inchesOkay. So 48 feet to 52 feet or I'm sorry somewhere along in that? Uh-huh. But never above 48 inches? Oh, definitely, yes. Okay. All right. And your brother, Adrian -- Adan. How do you say that? Adan. Adan, he has done this a lot? Yes. Is that his main job? Yes. Okay. So he's very familiar with the equipment -- A. Q. A. Q. Oh, definitely. -- and reading it? Yes. Did he indicate that he had Okay. All right. any issues with controlling all. Page 36 Q. equipment problems? A. Not at all. Q. Okay. So Thursday, y'all started about 8:00 o'clock? A. Uh-huh. Q. And about what time did y'all finish Thursday? A. We finished between 4:30, 5:00. And we started just picking up everything. We left out of there about 5:30. Q. Okay. Now, then -- and you still had some ways to go, correct? A. Yes, ran out of standing. Q. But you realized that it was late in the evening? A. Uh?huhstopping point. And when you get to a stopping point, do you bring your do you use the locator and directional device to bring the bore bit up out of the ground? A. Yes. Q. Now, did it come up under a concrete sidewalk or where did it come up at? A. It came up exactly next to the sidewalk but a foot, a foot?and-a-half away going towards the house. Q. And do you know what house number that was? Or Chm-Page 37 is there any way we can locate that area where it came up at? A. Yes. I can give it to you. Just a second. Q. Okay. A. We stopped at F, standing front house 107. Q. Okay. So you stopped at 107? A. Yes. Q. And it came up, and was anything odd about the bit? A. Not at all. Q. And when you bring it up, explain to me, does it like just drill out out of A. The ground. Q. the ground and it's just spinning? A. Yes. Q. And you just stop it? A. Yes. Q. And what do you do after you stop it? A. Well, we stop it, we clean it. We clean it to make sure we didn't have nothing for one, so we didn't hit anything. So once we clean it, there's a screw inside the drill head that we have to take out in order, pull back, attach this adaptor. And that adaptor is connected to a clevis and that clevis is also connected Page 38 to a pulley line. And that pulley line is connected to the innerduct that which we need to use to pull back that conduit. Q. So is the conduit connected to it while it's digging? A. Yes. Moves, once we're pulling back, yes. Q. Okay. So you've got your drill bit. And then about how far back is the I'm just going to call it the sleeve for the fiber optic, the black sleeve. A. Okay. Q. From the drill bit backwards, what's the space between the drill bit and the sleeve when it's underground? A. The drill bit and the sleeve, it's about the distance of six I will say eight inches at the most. Q. Okay. So when you bring this up out of the ground -- A. Okay. Q. -- is the black sleeve, is it -- does the black sleeve come out of the ground or does it stay below ground? A. The black sleeve stays below ground. Q. Okay. So -- but is the black sleeve in the curvature coming up out of the ground? A. That's the drill stem, yes. The drill stem is Page 39 a metal rod that comes that is connected to the drill head that we tell the locator tells me to push it in a certain angle or degree so we can pop out of the ground. And we can be able to take that screw out and connect to that sleeve, that black sleeve, and which we need to place underground, leave underground for the fiber optic cable to be easily pushed in there. Q. Okay. All right. So when all when the drill head came up out of the ground, you didn't see any problems with itall. Just besides being muddy, that's the only thing we see. Q. Just debris from the digging itself? A. Yes. Q. The dirt, that was it A. Yes. Q. -- and mud. Okay. And that was Thursday afternoon? A. Yes. Q. Now, you told me that you had a hydraulic leak? A. Uh-huh. Q. When did you discover the leak? A. I discovered it Thursday. Q. Okay. And so that was something you was LON Page 40 looking at to repair -- repair that afternoon, but I think it turned into a bigger repair job than you thought? A. Uh?huh. Q. Okay. So when did you back -- the boring machine back around to where it is today? A. It was this Friday Thursday evening. Q. Okay. All right. Now, then, did you have a chance to visit with any of the homeowners out there concerning a hydraulic leak? A. Yes. Friday morning, we had a homeowner requesting for us to clean his front driveway towards the street area. Because that's where we had unloaded our bore machine. It was leaking oil and it had left a little pile of oil stain in his front house. So he requested, since he seen us cleaning, he requested for us to clean his spot, which we did all -- nothing but cleaning on Friday. Q. Okay. Now, in relationship to the house that blew up, 113, is it going to be on that side of the street? A. Yes. Q. And it's going to be north of that or south of that house? A. North is Page 41 Q. The one going all the way down. So it would be south of you? A. Yes. Q. About how many houses south? A. One. Q. One house south? A. Yes. Q. So not the adjacent house but the next house? A. Yeah, the next house. Yes. Q. Okay. All right. Now, then, I want to go back and visit with when you -- the -- when the bore machine comes up out of the ground and you took your bore bit off, does can air go through the pipe and right out through the surface? A. Oh, yes. Q. Okay. So we have you pressured at the opposite end of the black sleeve, then it would blow out at that end where the drill bit was? A. Uh?huh. Q. Okay. Do you -- so you don't plug it or anything like that? A. We don?t, no. Q. Okay. All right. Now, then, Friday morning -- y'all left out there about what time Thursday evening? A. About 5:30. Page 42 Q. Okay. Now, then, you come back Friday morning? Uh?huh. Q. And your what's Fridays for? A. Fridays is normally to do cleanup and to have do all the backfills or cleaning any neighbors' sites that we might have either cut the grass too low or we did anything that we might have they might complain on us about. So that's why we need to either backfill or clean any mess that we left behind on Fridays. Q. Right. Okay. So it's taking care of little things that you didn't get taken care of the week that you started? A. Yes, yes. Q. And one of these things was clean up the hydraulic oil? A. Yes. Q. So you are right back out there Friday morning right where right where we know that the it went through the sewer pipe where the gas line is. And there was no indications that anything was wrong? A. Yes. Q. And if something had been wrong, what would you have expected to see? A. I would do do my proper procedure. Call Page 43 If we would have noticed, we would have called and get the proper procedure for it. Q. Okay. But my question is, what would you expect gas line? A. Oh, okay. We would have first smelled it. And then we would have heard a non?ignoring noise that don't stop that let's us know we just caused this damage. Q. Okay. And how do you know that's what would happen? A. Oh, the smell and the the feeling of the smell that is leaving out in the air. Q. Have you seen that happen before? A. Yes. Q. So past experience tells you that if you'd hit a pressured gas line, a service gas line -- A. Yes. Q. that you should hear a noise? A. Uh?huh. Q. And you should see disruption of the dirt or dust blowing out? A. Out of the same exact place that we had supposedly damaged. Q. Right above it? A. Right above it. Q. Right what about would you expect dirt to Page 44 be blowing back out your start of your borehole where you started? A. You could have smelled it, too, if it's that we out something, yes. Q. So either at the beginning or at the end -- A. Yes. Q. you would expect to see that? A. Or in the middle right above it, yes. Q. Right. And there was no indications of that? A. None whatsoever. Q. Okay. Now, then, you returned back on Monday, because Friday -- y'all got through about what time Friday? A. About 4:30. I believe we left no longer than 5:00, we were already out. Q. Yeah. So and that was you was out there taking care of stuff that that in the whole subdivision where you had been doing it back on Secretariat Street? A. Yes. Q. So it wasn't like you was right there where the explosion occurred that whole day? A. Yes. Q. You was -- A. Cleaning up the whole street. 9:00, Q. Q. A Q. arrived? A. Q. A. there with us, Q. :15 Q. A Page 45 cleaning up from the whole week? Yes. And, again, about what time Friday did you No longer than 5:00, I was already out. Okay. All right. And when did you come back? I came back Monday morning. About what time? I arrived there about between no longer than I would say. Around 9:00 Yes. So the explosion had already occurred? Yes. Did you know about the explosion before you Yes. And how did you know about it? We had a prior employee that also was drilling he had arrived right before I did. Okay. So he -- he got out there and and -- Heard everything. Now, was he there when the explosion happened? He wasn't there, but he was around the street on the by Secretariat Street. Okay. there? A. No. Page 46 But it had already happened when he got Q. So it happened while he was on Secretariat Street? A. Yes. Q. Okay. All right. A. Neto. Q. Neto? A. Yes. Q. How do you spell that? A. N?e-t-o. Q. And his last name? A. I don't know his last name. the other crew. Q. Part of another crew? And what's his name? He's just part of A. With Circle L, yes. Q. And he works for Circle A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, what was Circle L's crew doing? A. I think we were all arriving at the same time. We that was our location to meet up at the job site between 8:00 to 9:00. Q. Had Circle done any work on this boring project with you? Page 47 A. Yes. Q. Had had they done any work Thursday out there with you? A. Yes. They were also drilling in the opposite neighborhood. Q. Okay. But they wasn't at the location where the explosion happened? A. No way. Now, then, so Monday you get Q. Okay. All right. out there. When you get there, the explosion has already happened? A. Yes. Q. Tell me what happens when you pull into the subdivision. A. I'm trying to find out what happened. I'm trying to go out and help and see what was going on and they were trying to keep me out. Q. Who was trying to keep you out? A. The police and ambulance. Q. Okay. But at some point in time, did you get to where Atmos had uncovered some pipes? A. Yes. Q. And about what time was that? A. That was late in the evening when they uncovered the damaged lines. Page 48 Q. Okay. And what did you see? A. I seen that my innerduct was underneath their gas. And when they measured up, they didn't show exactly what they were telling me how it happened. Q. And you took a picture of that? A. Uh?huh. Q. And I was able to take a picture of your picture, and it shows that you are underneath the service line? A. Yes. Q. And it also shows that the pipe is in -- the gas service line is intact above your borehole above your casing that you installed? A. Yes. Q. And that the service line is broken towards the street side? A. Yes. Q. Several inches away from your casing A. Yes. Q. -- that you installed? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And there looked like there's about maybe it's hard to tell on this -- but maybe a foot of gas line missing? A. Yes, about a foot or two, yes. Page 49 Q. Okay. And you took several photographs of that? A. Oh, yes. Q. And that was with the permission of Atmos? A. Yes. Q. And what happened when you was taking them photographs? A. I had a certain limit of time of doing it while I was trying to start my own investigation I had of my pictures versus theirs, and I was kicked out immediately. Q. Do you know why you was asked to leave? A. I was told to leave, yes. As soon as Juan heard one of the Atmos guys saying, this is the fourth time that we had to come out here this month prior to these neighborhood people calling in they had smelled gas leaks in their homes. Q. Okay. So an Atmos employee said what? A. This is the fourth time that we had to come out here in this neighborhood, that the peoples' homes had smelled gas leaks in their homes. Q. And what period of time was he talking about here? A. In this whole past month. Q. So the Atmos employee stated that this is the Page 50 fourth time that they had to come out to this neighborhood because of gas leaks? A. Yes. Q. In the past 30 days or the past month? A. Past month, yes. Q. Did he indicate when -- the very last time they was out? A. No. Q. Okay. All right. And then after that statement was made, did you try to confirm that with anybody? A. I tried to confirm because we looked turned around and looked to see exactly if he will repeat it again or what was he talking about. As soon as we turned around and looked, at the same time trying to concentrate and make -- take my pictures, which when we turned around at the same time and I'm trying to do that, the Atmos guy looked up at us and noticed that we were trying to listen to what he was saying. And immediately that same officer that escorted us was told by the Atmos guy to get us out of there immediately. Q. So when Atmos realized that you overhead what they said, they asked the police officer to escort you (JUN Page 51 out? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, then, who overheard that remark? A. We all did. Q. Yourself, and did Juan hear it? A He was the first one. And when he told me, I heard the last part of what they were saying. But it did add up with what he was telling me, yes. Q. Okay. All right. Okay. A. Because when you hear things like that, you start staring at them like -- like that. So he knew that he noticed that we were staring at him, told us to get out immediately. Q. And the guy that made the statement about the being out there four previous times, is he the one that told you to leave or did somebody else? A. He told the officer to tell us to leave. Q. Okay. And the officer escorted you out? Yes. Q. Now, was you allowed back in later? A I was allowed back in when they started doing the digging process, which was like 10 hours later. Q. Okay. And what did you see at that time? A. The picture that I showed you. Q. Okay. So you was out there before they started Page 52 digging? A. Yes. I was out there immediately in the morning. Q. Right. But so about what time was that comment made? A. I would say between 11:00 and 1:00. Between 11:00 and 1:00. Q. Okay. So what had Atmos invited you over to show you? A. I was eager to try to take some type of pictures. Q. Okay. A. I was eager to go there, and I kept telling them I'm the contractor for here and they just was blowing me off. They were trying to concentrate more on Atmos trying to do their thing. Q. Right. Make it safe? A. Make it safe. Q. Okay. All right. Okay. Let me review my notes right quick. Do you -- do you believe that the bore bit was at the proper depth? A. Yes. Q. And, again, how -- how is that depth tell me how how does that work? You told me that your Page 53 locator -- and I guess that's a device, A. It's a very accurate device that's the locator is determined, everything about it, from the transmitter beacon sound, is the -- it looks like a long banana. In other words, inside the drill head that tells the locator exactly where is it at, versus the locator that the locators have that locate the existing lines, which is USIC and Heath Consultants. Our drill head locator is more accurate versus the one they have. The reason why, because their ground line that they have, you don't know how old it is. Sometimes it won't give you a very accurate marking of what is under there already, versus ours being there in that very moment. Q. So you have very -- you have confidence that yours is accurate and and the measurements is correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. All right. Would you like to add anything else to the interview that we haven't discussed or talked about that you may feel like is important? A. I wish Atmos would have given me more time so I can do my own pictures, investigating and find out more instead of them trying to be so disclosure, just focus on themselves and try to keep things away from me Page 54 hearing and knowing. Q. A. A. company? liability insurance from Accord. Do you have -- do you have insurance? Yes. Liability insurance? Yes. Okay. Do you know the name of your liability It looks like you have a certificate of And it looks like you have a million two million aggregate. And let's see. A. And workers' comp. Q. And workers' comp as well. A. And the umbrella. Q. And you have an umbrella. Okaypolicy number -- or who is your contact person? A. Policy number? Q. Do you mind if I take who is the contact person there? A. Q. Q. A Texas Mutual Ebstein Insurance. Texas Mutual? Yes. Ebstein Insurance Company. And what? And this, it names three insurers, insurers of full coverage. Q. Okay. COM Page 55 I can give you this copy. if you'd like. I can take a picture of it, if you don't mind. Okay. What have you contacted your insurance company to bring them up to speed of what's happened? A. Q. Okay. name? A. Q. A. Q. What's that? A. I130 I130 1130 I0 Do you have a contact person there? Yes. Okay. So they're aware of of the situation. What's that Marcia Levy. Marcia? Yes. She's the main Her last name is how do you spell it? L-e -- I can't see it. L-e-v-y. L?e-v-y. And her number? It's 972 -- 972. 418 418. 4999. 4999. Three 95. Okay. All right. Now, you need to contact them and keep them up to speed. A. Okay. Page 56 Everybody Is supposed to, right. Everybody will be put on notice. Just what happens in these situations -- A. Q. There is that you A. Q. (3 E) c) Q. September the 23rd, Okay. so you'll have something to reference. a shadow there. I can't see it. What is that were saying right there (indicating)? That's the policy number. Oh. okay. Can you read the policy number? CIP. Hold it. Say it again. Wait. C, cat, I as in Ivan, as in Perry. Right. 237489. Great. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir. Okay. The time is 1:45 p.m. on Wednesday. 2015. Rigo, did I have your permission to record the conversation? A. Q. YES . And there's nothing else you need to add at this time? A. No, sir. The interview is complete. Thank you so much. Page 57 Thank you, sir. 101302016 . DCAD: Residential Acct Detail Location Owner . a tr? It: Legal Desc Value Main Improvement Estimated Taxes History Home Find Property Contact Us Property Location (Current 2017) Address: Neighborhood: 4USHO3 Mapsco: 62-U (DALLAS) DCAD Property Map 2016 Appraisal Notice Electronic Documents (ENS) 102 FAIRMEADOWS DR File Homestead Exemption Oniine a Print Homestead Exemption Form Owner (Current 2017) YANEZ ADAN 81 MARIA. 102 FAIRMEADOWS DR DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS 751162711 Muiti-Owner {Current 2017) Owner Name Ownership YANEZ ADAN MARIA 100% Legal Desc (Current 2017) FAIRMEADOWS 2 BLK LOT 46 5: 0385000304600 22203850003 Deed Transfer Date: 328/ 1995 00031695 CO-DALLAS Value 2016 Certi?ed Values Improvement: $57, 280 Land: 17 0 0 Market Value: =$74,280 Revaluation Year: 2016 Previous Revaluation Year: 2015 Main Improvement (Current 2017) Residential Account #22038500030460000 Additional Improvements Land Exemptions Building Class ?14 Construction Type l Baths (Full/Half) Year Built ?1951 Foundation IISLAB Kitchens I Effective Year Built "1961 Roof Type Bedrooms JIB Actual Age Ilse years Roof Material SHINGLES wet Bars Ilo Desirability Fence Type Fireplaces jlo Living Area jlmaz Ext. Wall Material VENEER Sprinkler (YINaspx?iD=22038500030460000 113 RETURN OF SERVICE RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET No. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION RULES FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS The attached Notice of Hearing, Second Amended Original Complaint, and Certi?cate of Service in the above referenced docket has been served in person on Metro Bore, by delivery to Metro Bore at the request of the Respondent, by telephone conversation, the Respondent was served at 534 Holly Ln. Duncanville, Texas 75116 on 7/27/2017 at 11:02 AM, and leaving said instrument with Riga Yanez Owner of Metro Bore. EXecuted in Dallas, State of Texas, on the 27"" day ofJ'uIy 201 7 . STEVEN .TRENI [Name ofpersan who served instrument? PROCESS SERVER [Title of person who served instrumean SCHI 9 1 2 process server Identi?cation umber] 4/3 0/2019 [Expiration date ofcenyicarion] On September 28, 2017, a hearing will be held at 9:00 am in the William B. Travis Building, 1701 North Congress, Austin, Texas. This hearing will be held under thejurisdiction and authority of: Chapter 2001 of the Texas Government Code; Section 121.201 of Chapter 121 of the Texas Utilities Code; Sections 1 17.01 1-117.012 of Chapter 117 of the Texas Nattnal Resources Code; and Section 756.126 of Chapter - 75 6 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. For room assignment, please check the bulletin board in the ?rst ?oor lobby on the morning of the hearing. SIGNATURE OF PERSON SERVING CONIPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING My name is Steven 4. reni, and my address is PO Box 80181 I and USA . I declare under penalty Ofpeij ury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Dallas County, Texas, on the 27"l day of July, 2017. SW Signature CHRISTI CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL RYAN SITTON, COMMISSIONER DAVID W. COONEY, R., DIRECTOR WAYNE CHRISTIAN, COMMISSIONER ENFORCEMENT SECTION RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL "Ar/706 (Raf-3, February 1,2017 . 2k? a ?33 Metro Bore ?9 $31 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Re: DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET No. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF A COMMISSION RULE FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABLAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED) WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS, RESULTING IN DAMAGE To AN INTRASTATE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2015. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING Information on ?le in our of?ce indicates that Metro Bore has violated a provision of the Railroad Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as set forth more fully in the attached First Amended Original Complaint. This letter is notice of the captioned docket pending against Metro Bore. According to Section 1.49 of the Commission's General Rules Of Practice and Procedure [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.49] which was adopted effective April 2, 1996, you may, within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this notice, ?le an answer or request a hearing to contest the allegations of the First Amended Original Complaint. The date of service of this notice is computed under Statewide Rule 48(g) [Tex. R.R. Conun'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE amended effective June 1, 1991. You may hire an attorney or other representative or choose to appear on your own behalf. Section 1.49 also provides that if, on the thirty-?rst (Blst) day after the date of service, you have not entered into an agreed settlement order, ?led an answer to the First Amended Original Complaint, or requested a hearing, a default f'mal order may thereafter be issued against you without further notice. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE Box 12967 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2967 11: PHONE: 512/463-6762 FAX: 512/463-6989 TDD 800-735-2989 OR TOY 512-463-7284 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER hup. state tx.us Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and Texas Damage Report Forms which will be offered into evidence in this case. The ?le is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inSpection or copying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858. Under 121.206, Texas Utility Code, the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000 per day per violation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs, and attomeys' fees being adjudged against you. OFFER 0F SETTLEMENT If you agree to settle this matter for the violation set forth in the First Amended Original Complaint and pay an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by March 10, 2017, I will recommend that the Commission settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Checks should be made out to the "Railroad Commission of Texas" and should include the docket number on the check. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our office by contacting me at the number below. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it, reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. IF YOU DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE, FILE AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT, OR REQUEST A HEARING, A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER MAY BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. 7A. 005%? Sincerely, Hailey A. Wblf, Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the First Amended Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, Certi?ed Return Receipt Requested postage fully prepaid, on this the 1m day of February 2017, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 CMONOO =11. use was]. 703E Wu? Lian I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the First Amended Original Complaint in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, ?rst-class postage fully prepaid, on this the day of February 2017, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Bill Drury, Legal Afstant Of?ce of General unsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-6858 cc: Damage Prevention Section-Austin ?1 a 34/ RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS 2; DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44343: ENFORCEMENT ACTION METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A Saga?g, A, UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 .53, 47.. (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS '"?gog?hg FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL CONIPLAINT Comes now the Railroad Commission of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this First Amended Original Complaint charging Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with violations of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules 4(e) and 11(b) at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION 1. The Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent undeTEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ??121.201 and under TEX. NAT. RES. CODE ANN. and under TEX. HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ??756. 126. Under the Railroad Commission's General Rule of Practice and Procedure R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE notice of hearing may be served on Respondent by regular mail and by Certi?ed Mail, Return Receipt Requested, at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr., Duncanville, Texas 75116, the "Excavator address reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form (?TDRF?)filed on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent to a One?Call Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8, 2015, ticket number 1575144185. 2. Respondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1(a) at the captioned location. The ReSpondent is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid-Texas Div. ("Operator") designated ReSpondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commission a TDRF report on November 1 1, 2015, for the subject incident. First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(e) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict? response from an Operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the proposed excavation and has received an ?all clear or ?no con?ict" response from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No. 1 043 00. The Respondent stated that he knew the markings were wrong yet continued to excavate during his deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigation (See ?le for copy of the deposition pages 19-22 of Ri go Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). Respondent indicated that the markings from the ?rst notice stopped at the curb yet the pipeline continued past the markings onto the sidewalk. ReSpondent became aware and had knowledge of the erroneous positive response because while excavating he determined that the pipeline continued past the markings. Once Respondent became aware of the unmarked pipeline Respondent continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center as required. (See pages 19-22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority 1 Fire Investigations). 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of property; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1(b) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1 requires each excavator that damages an underground pipeline to notify the operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days of the incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference 0. 159606 for the subject damage incident. 2.2. On October 13, 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst class mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by ?rst class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingent upon Respondent?s compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); speci?cally, submission of Respondent?s Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that, as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 4 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1(b) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Conunission could impede goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing Respondentanadministrative (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(e) at $1,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries, plus $25 ,0000 for the impact to the residential and public area), or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing Respondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and 3. ordering any other relief to which, under the pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. ReSpect?illy submitted, First Amended Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 5 Hailgy A. Wolf/ Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463-2088 FAX No. (512) 463-7001 P. 0. Box 12967 Austin, Texas 78711-2967 Dated: February 1, 2017 CHRISTI CRADDICK, CHAIRMAN ALEXANDER C. SCHOCH, GENERAL COUNSEL DAVID PORTER, COMMISSIONER W. ., RYAN SITTON, COMMISSIONER we}:ch guT 5 43?? {9 6R5 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS Ag, 17 OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL ?9 6% 6 December 19, 2016 Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Re: DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44848: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST METRO BORE FOR VIOLATION OF A COMMISSION RULE FOR UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION AT 112 ARABIAN RD. (THOROUGHBRED) WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS, RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO AN INTRASTATE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2015. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING Information on ?le in our of?ce indicates that Metro Bore has violated a provision of the Railroad Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules, as set forth more fully in the attached Original Complaint. This letter is notice Of the captioned docket pending against Metro Bore. According to Section 1.49 of the Commission's General Rules of Practice and Procedure [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 1.49] which was adopted effective April 2, 1996, you may, within thirty (30) days of the date Of service of this notice, ?le an answer or request a hearing to contest the allegations of the Original Complaint. The date of service of this notice is computed under Statewide Rule 48(g) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE amended effective June 1, 1991. You may hire an attorney or other representative or choose to appear on your own behalf. Section 1 .49 also provides that if, on the thirty-first (3lst) day after the date of service, you have not entered into an agreed settlement order, ?led an answer to the Original Complaint, or requested a hearing, a default ?nal order may thereafter be issued against you without further notice. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE Box 12967 ir AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2967 PHONE: 512/463-6762 FAX: 512/463-6989 TDD 800?735-2989 OR TDY 512-463-7284 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER http: summits Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, Page 2 The Railroad Commission Enforcement Section docket ?le contains records and Texas - Damage Report Forms which will be offered into evidence in this case. The ?le is available for inspection at any time during business hours. To arrange for inspection or copying of this ?le, please call Bill Drury at (512) 463-6858. Under 121.206, Texas Utility Code, the Commission may assess an administrative penalty of up to $10,000 per day per violation. Additionally, referral of the matter to the Attorney General for collection and enforcement could result in additional civil penalties, court costs, and attorneys' fees being adjudged against you. OFFER 0F SETTLEMENT If you agree to settle this matter for the violation set forth in the Original Complaint and pay an administrative penalty of $58,500.00 by January 24, 2016, I will recommend that the Commission settle this case with an agreed settlement order. Checks should be made out to the "Railroad Commission of Texas" and should include the docket number on the check. Direction for settlement and an agreed settlement order requiring your signature may be obtained from our of?ce by contacting me at the number below. When the Commission considers my recommendation, it may either accept it, reject it, or instruct me to seek a different administrative penalty. IF YOU DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE, FILE AN ANSWER TO THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT, OR REQUEST A HEARING, A DEFAULT FINAL ORDER MAY BE ISSUED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. ?W/iww/J Hailey A. Wolf, S?Laff Attorney Of?ce of General ounsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-2088 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a c0py of the Original Complaint, in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by. depositing same in the United States Mail, Certi?ed Return Receipt Requested postage fully prepaid, on this the 19?? day of December 2016, preperly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 C. M. No. ?i?l?ll 'r'ElEiE' I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, together with a copy of the Original Complaint in Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, on the persons named below by depositing same in the United States Mail, ?rst-class postage fully prepaid, on this the 19 day of December 2016, properly addressed as follows: Metro Bore 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr. Duncanville, Texas 75116 Mmr/ Bill Drury, Legal As?istant Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas (512) 463-6858 cc: Damage Prevention Section-Austin A. 1"11 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS 23760;. DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 44843: ENFORCEMENT METRO BORE FOR VIOLATIONS OF A COMMISSION 6 ORIGINAL CONIPLAINT Comes now the Railroad Commission of Texas ("the Commission") and ?les this Original Complaint charging Rigo Yanez and Adan Yanez, individually and d/b/a Metro Bore ("Respondent" or "Excavator") with violations of Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rules 4(e) and 11(b) at the captioned location, where damage to an underground intrastate pipeline occurred on September 21, 2015, as set forth fully below. JURISDICTION l. The Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent undeTEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ??121.201 and under TEX. NAT. RES. CODE ANN. and under TEX. a fig 31:19.5? I .9: UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DANIAGE PREVENTION AT 112 (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS mgr/,1,ng 3/ 17? 04? HEALTH SAFETY CODE ANN. ??756. 126. Under the Railroad Commission's General Rule of Practice and Procedure R.R. Conun'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE notice of hearing may be served on Respondent by regular mail and by Certi?ed Mail, Return Receipt Requested, at Metro Bore, 102 E. Fairmeadows Dr., Duncanville, Texas 75116, the "Excavator address" reported most recently to the Commission through the Texas Damage Reporting Form (?TDRF?)filed on November 11, 2015. This same address was provided by Respondent to a One-Cal] Noti?cation center in accordance with TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. ?251.152 on September 8, 2015, ticket number 1575144185. 2. Respondent is the person responsible for engaging in or preparing to engage in the movement of earth in the vicinity of an intrastate underground pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1(a) at the captioned location. The Respondent is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Atmos Energy Corp. Mid?Texas Div. ("Operator") designated Respondent as the Excavator by submitting to the Commission a TDRF report on November 1 1, 2015, for the subject incident. Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 2 UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 4(e) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE requires that, following a ?rst notice, if an excavator is not positive that the excavation area is clear, excavation must not begin until a second notice has been given to a noti?cation center. Under Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule an excavator must give a second notice if: 1) the excavator has knowledge of the existence of an underground pipeline and has received an ?all clear? or ?no con?ict? response from an operator, 2) the excavator observes clear evidence of the presence of an unmarked underground pipeline in the area of the pr0posed excavation and has received an ?all clear or ?no con?ict? reSponse from an operator, 3) there is no positive response for the excavation area, or 4) the positive response is unclear or obviously erroneous. 2. Conunission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No. 104300. The Excavator was aware that the positive response was obviously erroneous and failed to provide a second notice to the noti?cation center. The Excavator stated that he knew the markings were in the wrong location and proceeded to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center. The Excavator stated that he knew the pipelines were not marked properly. The markings stopped once it reached the curb but the Excavator continued to dig and determined that the pipeline continued and was then aware of the erroneous markings but continued to excavate without providing a second notice to the noti?cation center after he became aware of the error. (See pages 19-22 of Rigo Yanez deposition with Priority I Fire Investigations) 3. By failing to give a noti?cation center a second notice prior to excavation activities, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) [16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 4(e) can Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 3 lead to such serious consequences as, but not limited to, personal injury or death of one or more persons by excavation activity; destruction of property; loss of natural resources; and environmental damage or pollution. UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION RULE 11(b) 1. Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1(b) [Tex. R.R. Comm'n, 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE ?18.1 requires each excavator that damages an underground pipeline to notify the Operator of the damage through a noti?cation center immediately but no later than two (2) hours following the damage incident. An excavator, pursuant to Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 must also submit report of the damage incident to the Commission through TDRF within ten (10) days of the incident. 2.1. Commission records indicate that on September 21, 2015, Respondent caused damage to Operator's underground pipeline located at 112 Arabian Rd. (Thoroughbred) Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas; Damage Incident No.104300. On November 11, 2015, the Operator submitted to the Commission its Operator report Reference No. 159606 for the subject damage incident. 2.2. On October 13, 2015, the Commission sent Respondent by ?rst class mail requests to comply with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) by submitting online its correSponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Conunission records indicate that Respondent failed to ?le its corresponding Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident after the requests were sent. 2.3. On January 11, 2016, and again on March 1, 2016, the Commission sent Respondent, by ?rst class mail, offers of settlement for the subject damage incident contingent upon Respondent?s compliance with Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b); speci?cally, submission of Respondent?s Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Commission records indicate that, as of the date of this Complaint, Respondent has not submitted to the Commission its Excavator report Reference No. 159669 for the subject damage incident. Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 4 3. By failing to submit a report of the damage incident to the Commission, Respondent violated Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 11(b) ADMIN. CODE 4. Respondent?s violation of Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule 1 1(b) is serious and a hazard to the public health and safety because a violation of any one Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention Rule regarding Pipeline Damage Prevention can lead to serious consequences. Failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Commission could impede goals to collect and share statistical data with persons whose objectives are to determine trends and ways to reduce third-party damage incidents. GOOD FAITH Respondent has acted in bad faith because it failed to comply with a Commission rule for its obligations at the subject location and failed to adequately explain its inaction to the Commission. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Commission staff requests that notice be given and a hearing be held to consider the above-referenced violation, and requests the Commission to thereafter enter an order: 1. assessing Respondentanadministrative penaltyof $78,000.00 (one violation of Rule 11(b) at $2,000.00, one violation of rule 4(e) at $1,000.00, plus an enhancement of $75,000.00 enhancement per recorded injury with two recorded injuries, plus $25 ,0000 for the impact to the residential and public area), or such other amount as may be established by the evidence; 2. directing Respondent to place the subject incident into compliance with Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Rules 11(b) and all other applicable Commission Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention rules or statutes as may be applicable; and Original Complaint, Damage Prevention Docket No. 44848, page 5 3. ordering any other relief to which, under the pleadings and the evidence, the Enforcement Section may show itself entitled. Respectfully submitted, Hailey A. Wolf}r Staff Attorney Of?ce of General Counsel - Enforcement RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS State Bar No. 24082569 Telephone No. (512) 463-2088 FAX No. (512) 463?7001 P. O. Box 12967 Austin, Texas 78711-2967 Dated: December 19, 2016 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF '1 LXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 044847: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. FOR VIOLATION OF UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION COMMISSION RULE 16 TAC and 18.8(a) AT 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS STIPULATIQN, AGREED SETTLEMENT AND CONSENT ORDER On this day the above-entitled and numbered docket came on for consideration by the Railroad Commission of Texas ("Commission"). The Oversight and Safety Division of the Commission, and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV., through their representatives, have agreed to an informal diSposition of the matters under this docket through this Consent Order ("Order"), subject to the approval of the Commission. The Commission has authority to informally dispose of this case through a consent order pursuant to TEX. CODE ANN. 2001.056 IN SETTLEMENT OF THIS DOCKET, the Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. do hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 1. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. is a person who Operates, on his or her own behalf, or as an agent designated by the owner, a pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under Title 16, ?18.2 of the Texas Administrative Code. 2. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. is a "person" as that term is de?ned by Title 16, ?18.2(l6) of the Texas Administrative Code. 3. The Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. agree that the alleged violations, as set forth in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847, regarding 16 TAC and 18.8(a) on September 21, 2015, at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas, are hereby settled and compromised under the terms of this Order. 4. The alleged violations by ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. constitute an alleged violation of a safety standard or rule relating to the prevention of damage to facilities containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide. 5. Neither this Order, nor any written or oral offer of settlement related thereto, nor any statement contained therein shall constitute evidence or an admission or adjudication of: (A) any fact or conclusion of law alleged in or relating to Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847; (B) any violation of any statute, rule or regulation or other wrongdoing or misconduct on the part of ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. or any director, of?cer, agent, employee, contractor or af?liate thereof. 6. The Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. wish to further the goal of safe operations of earth movement activities near pipelines containing ?ammable, toxic or corrosive gas, hazardous liquids, or carbon dioxide, within the State of Texas. 7. The Commission has considered any history of previous violations by ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV., the seriousness of any alleged violation, and any hazard to the health or safety of 10. ll. 12. the public, and has determined that the facts of this case warrant an informal diSposition of the Commission's concerns under the terms of this Order. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. has elected not to avail itself of the opportunity for public hearing. The Commission has jurisdiction to assess an administrative penalty against ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV., pursuant to Sections 121.206 and 121.207 of the Texas Utilities Code. An administrative penalty in the amount of SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS shall be recovered by the Commission for the alleged violations asserted against ATMOS ENERGY CORR, DIV.. Respondent has placed, in the possession of the Commission, {?nds in the amount of SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS for deposit in the General Revenue Fund, as payment of administrative penalty assessed in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847. The person signing hereunder for ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. has authority to represent ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. in this matter. Jurisdiction of this docket having been established and an agreement of the parties having been reached, it is, therefore, ORDERED by the Railroad Commission of Texas that ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. be assessed an administrative penalty in the amount of SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS and that Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847 be informally disposed of by the Consent Order and closed. All relief not granted in this Order is DENIED. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS (Order approved and signature af?xed by Master Agreed Order dated I APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. By: Title: Signature MR. JEFFREY S. KNIGHTS VICE PRESIDENT, TECHNICAL SERVICES Kari French David Porter. CHAIRMAN DIRECTOR Christi Craddick, COMMISSIONER Ryan Sitton. COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION 455-23 February 29, 2016 ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. ATTN: MR. JEFFREY S. KNIGHTS P. 0. BOX 223705 DALLAS, TX 75222-3705 Re: Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847: Violation of Commission Rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, 16 T.A.C. and 18.8(a) at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas on September 21, 2015. Dear Mr. Jeffrey S. Knights: This letter is to advise you that records submitted to the Commission indicate that ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. was in violation of the requirements of Commission Rule 16 T.A.C. and and indicate that ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. was responsible for the subject violations. Speci?cally, ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. violated Commission Rule 16 TAC Sections: 18,5131 - The Operator did not provide a postive response within the time frames Speci?ed in Texas Utilities Code, Chapter 251 after the ?rst notice received. - The Operator's Line Locator failed to use all information necessary to mark the underground pipelines accurately. Due to the serious nature of these violations, this matter could be referred to the Commission's Enforcement Section for immediate enforcement action. However, this letter is being sent to you as an offer to settle if ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. will agree to pay a reduced administrative penalty to the Commission for the cited violations. Any settlement will be contingent on: 1) any required compliance and the violations resolved, and 2) the payment of an administrative penalty to the Commission and such penalty amount being approved by the Commissioners, and 3) the return of the enclosed Agreed Order with your original signature. Penalty guidelines, found in 16 TAC ?13.12, for these very serious violations support the staff-recommended penalty of $97,500.00. However, the standard procedure of the Oversight Safety Division in these circumstances is to offer to settle this docket for a lesser penalty of $48,750.00. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX l296? AUSTIN, TX 78711-296? 0 (512) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 If you wish to settle this matter with an Agreed Order, please sign and return the attached Stipulation, Agreed Settlement, and Consent Order (?Order?). Sign the last page only and do not date or notarize the Order. With the Order, please send in the administrative penalty, by check, written to ?Railroad Commission of Texas.? Reference DP Docket No. 044847 in the check memo, and mail to the P.O. Box address found on the bottom of this letter. If you do not agree to this diSposition within 30 days of this letter, it will be referred to the Commission?s Legal Enforcement Section, where a formal complaint will be ?led. If you fail to answer the complaint, we will instruct Enforcement to proceed to a default hearing where the administrative penalty sought may reach a maximum penalty amount of $200,000 per day per violation. If you wish to discuss any compliance issues please call Michael Shields at (512) 463-0503. Your company's cooperation in resolving this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Damage Prevention Oversight and Safety Division Railroad Commission of Texas 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE 0 POST OFFICE BOX 12967 AUSTIN, TX 787! 1-2961!r (SIZ) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 044847: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. FOR VIOLATION OF UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION COMMISSION RULE 16 TAC and 18.8(a) AT 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS AGREED SETTLEMENT AND ORDER On this day the above-entitled and numbered docket came on for consideration by the Railroad Commission of Texas ("Commission"). The Oversight and Safety Division of the Commission, and ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV., through their representatives, have agreed to an informal disposition of the matters under this docket through this Consent Order ("Order"), subject to the approval of the Commission. The Commission has authority to informally dispose of this case through a consent order pursuant to TEX. CODE ANN. 2001.056 (1-3). IN SETTLEMENT OF THIS DOCKET, the Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. do hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 1. ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. is a person who operates, on his or her own behalf, or as an agent designated by the owner, a pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under Title 16, ?18.2 of the Texas Administrative Code. 2. ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. is a "person" as that term is de?ned by Title 16, ?18.2(l6) of the Texas Administrative Code. 3. The Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. agree that the alleged violations, as set forth in Damage Prevention Docket NO. 044847, regarding 16 TAC and 18.8(a) on September 21, 2015, at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas, are hereby settled and compromised under the terms of this Order. 4. The alleged violations by ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. constitute an alleged violation of a safety standard or rule relating to the prevention of damage to facilities containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide. 5. Neither this Order, nor any written or oral offer of settlement related thereto, nor any statement contained therein shall constitute evidence or an admission or adjudication of: (A) any fact or conclusion of law alleged in or relating to Damage Prevention Docket NO. 044847; (B) any Violation of any Statute, rule or regulation or other wrongdoing or misconduct on the part of ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. or any director, of?cer, agent, employee, contractor or af?liate thereof. 6. The Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORP., DIV. wish to ?lrther the goal of safe operations of earth movement activities near pipelines containing ?ammable, toxic or corrosive gas, hazardous liquids, or carbon dioxide, within the State Of Texas. 7. The Commission has considered any history of previous violations by ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV., the seriousness of any alleged violation, and any hazard to the health or safety of 10. 11. 12. the public, and has determined that the facts of this case warrant an informal disposition of the Commission's concerns under the terms of this Order. ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. has elected not to avail itself of the opportunity for public hearing. The Commission has jurisdiction to assess an administrative penalty against ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV., pursuant to Sections 121.206 and 121.207 of the Texas Utilities Code. An administrative penalty in the amount of FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS shall be recovered by the Commission for the alleged violations asserted against ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV.. Respondent has placed, in the possession of the Commission, funds in the amount of FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS for deposit in the General Revenue Fund, as payment of administrative penalty assessed in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847. The person signing hereunder for ATMOS ENERGY CORP., DIV. has authority to represent ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. in this matter. Jurisdiction of this docket having been established and an agreement of the parties having been reached, it is, therefore, ORDERED by the Railroad Commission of Texas that ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. be assessed an administrative penalty in the amount of FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS and that Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847 be informally disposed of by the Consent Order and closed. All relief not granted in this Order is DENIED. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS (Order approved and signature af?xed by Master Agreed Order dated APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIV. By: Title: Signature MR. JEFFREY S. KNIGHTS VICE PRESIDENT, TECHNICAL SERVICES Kari French David Porter, CHAIRMAN DIRECTOR Christi Craddick, COMMISSIONER Ryan Sitton, COMMISSIONER RAILROAD COMM SSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION 455_23 January 11, 2016 ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. ATTN: MR. JEFFREY S. KNIGHTS P. 0. BOX 223705 DALLAS, TX 75222-3705 Re: Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847: Violation of Commission Rules for Underground Pipeline Damage Prevention, l6 T.A.C. and 18.8(a) at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, ELLIS County, Texas on September 21, 2015. Dear Mr. Jeffrey S. Knights: This letter is to advise you that records submitted to the Commission indicate that ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. was in violation of the requirements of Commission Rule 16 T.A.C. and and indicate that ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. was responsible for the subject violations. Speci?cally, ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. violated Commission Rule 16 TAC Sections: 1- The Operator did not provide a postive reSponse within the time frames speci?ed in Texas Utilities Code, Chapter 251 after the ?rst notice received. 13.3! I - The Operator's Line Locator failed to use all information necessary to mark the underground pipelines accurately. Due to the serious nature of these violations, this matter could be referred to the Commission's Enforcement Section for immediate enforcement action. However, this letter is being sent to you as an offer to settle if ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. will agree to pay a reduced administrative penalty to the Commission for the cited violations. Any settlement will be contingent on: 1) any required compliance and the violations resolved, and 2) the payment of an administrative penalty to the Commission and such penalty amount being approved by the Commissioners, and 3) the return of the enclosed Agreed Order with your original signature. Penalty guidelines, found in 16 TAC ?18.12, for these very serious violations support the staff?recommended penalty of $3,500.00, plus an enhancement in the amount of $75,000.00 for a total of $78,500.00. However, the standard procedure of the Oversight Safety Division in these circumstances is to offer to settle this docket for a lesser penalty of $76,750.00. 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE '1 POST OFFICE BOX 12967 AUSTIN, TX 78711-2967 (512) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 512-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 gov If you wish to settle this matter with an Agreed Order, please sign and return the attached Stipulation, Agreed Settlement, and Consent Order (?Order?). Sign the last page only and do not date or notarize the Order. With the Order, please send in the administrative penalty, by check, written to ?Railroad Commission of Texas.? Reference DP Docket No. 044847 in the check memo, and mail to the PD. Box address found on the bottom of this letter. If you do not agree to this diSposition within 30 days of this letter, it will be referred to the Commission?s Legal Enforcement Section, where a formal complaint will be ?led. If you fail to answer the complaint, we will instruct Enforcement to proceed to a default hearing where the administrative penalty sought may reach a maximum penalty amount of $200,000 per day per violation. If you wish to discuss any compliance issues please call Michael Shields at (512) 463-0503. Your company's cooperation in resolving this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Damage Prevention Oversight and Safety Division Railroad Commission of Texas 1701 NORTH CONGRESS AVENUE 0 POST OFFICE BOX 12967 AUSTIN, TX 78711-2967 (512) 475-0512 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD 800-735-2989 or TDY 5i2-463-7284 FAX 512-463-7153 RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OVERSIGHT AND SAFETY DIVISION DAMAGE PREVENTION Penalty Calculation Worksheet for Docket No. 044847 Suggested Rule Cited Rule Description Penalty Amount 18.5(a) The Operator did not provide a postive reSponse within the time $5,000.00 95,000.00 frames speci?ed in Texas Utilities Code, Chapter 251 after the ?rst per day notice received. Ticket 1575144185 11 days out of compliance Ticket 1572426443 - 8 days out of compliance; 19 days total 18.8(a) The Operator's Line Locator failed to use all information necessary $2,500.00 8 2,500.00 to mark the underground pipelines accurately. Subtotal of Penalty Amount 97,500.00 Reduction for settlement before hearing: 50% 48,750.00 Subtotal (Penalty Amount minus Settlement Reduction): 48,750.00 Penalty Enhancement Amount: 0.00 Subtotal (Penalty Amount - Settlement Reduction Enhancement Amt): 48,750.00 Reduction for demonstrated good faith of person charged: 5 000 Total Penalty: 48,750.00 Page 1 of 1 Date: February 29, 2016 Haile Wolf From: Kathy Martinez Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 10:54 AM To: Hailey Wolf Subject: RE: Metro Bore 44848 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Yes ma'am. have received the documents and have sent them out to our PS for service. I will status you as soon as possible. Kathy Kathy Martinez Process Service Agent Direct Line: 512.358.0062 Direct Fax: 512.382.5702 Corporate Of?ce: 512.892.5700 Ext. 124 San Antonio Of?ce: 210.369.9030 Toll Free: 855.327.7901 Facsimile: 512.892.5703 NOTICE OF NEW ADDRESS: Please note our new Corporate Office Address: The Legal Connection, Inc., 7103 Oak Meadow, Suite A, Austin, Texas 78736. Our services include: Record Retrieval, Court Reporting, Videography Video Editing, Notary Public, and Process Service. NOTICE: The infomiation contained in this electronic mail message is con?dential and intended only for certain recipients. If you are not an intended reopient, you are hereby noti?ed that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication In error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it. From: Hailey Wolf Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 10:53 AM To: Kathy Martinez Subject: RE: Metro Bore 44848 Kathy, Would you please let me know if you (TLC) has received the email and attachments below? Thanks, Hailey A. Wolf, Esq. General Counsel- Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas 512.463.2088 From: Hailey Wolf Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 8:54 AM To: Subject: Metro Bore 44848 Greetings Kathy, Attached to this email are two attachments. One is a scan of the Second Amended Original Complaints, Notice of Hearing, and Settlement Offer within the Notice of Hearing. The other attachment is the certi?cate of service aka Return of Service form to be ?lled out once the process server has completed delivery. Please let me know when you get this. Thanks, Hailey A. Wolf, Esq. General Counsel- Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas 512.463.2088 Hailez Wolf From: Kathy Martinez Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 11:10 AM To: Hailey Wolf Subject: RE: Metro Bore 44848 Importance: High Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hello Hailey, Metro Bore was served today 7/27/2017, 11:02 am. at 1534 Holly Drive, Duncanville, TX and accepted by Rigo Yanez, Owner. I will forward the return of service to you as soon as possible. Kathy Kathy Martinez Process Service Agent Direct Line: 512.358.0062 Direct Fax: 512.382.5702 Corporate Of?ce: 512.892.5700 Ext. 124 San Antonio Of?ce: 210.369.9030 Toll Free: 855.327.7901 Facsimile: 512.892.5703 NOTICE OF NEW ADDRESS: Please note our new Corporate Office Address: The Legal Connection, Inc., 7103 Oak Meadow, Suite A, Austin, Texas 78736. Our services include: Record Retrieval, Court Reporting, Videography 8: Video Editing, Notary Public, and Process Service. NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail message is con?dential ard Intended only for certain recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby noti?ed that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosng it. From: Hailey Wolf Sent: Wednesday, July 19Ir 2017 8:54 AM To: Kathy Martinez Subject: Metro Bore 44848 Greetings Kathy, Attached to this email are two attachments. One is a scan of the Second Amended Original Complaints, Notice of Hearing, and Settlement Offer within the Notice of Hearing. The other attachment is the certificate of service aka Return of Service form to be ?lled out once the process server has completed delivery. Please let me know when you get this. Thanks, Hailey A. Wolf, Esq. General Counsel- Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas 512.463.2088 Hailey Wolf From: Kathy Martinez Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 2:02 PM To: Hailey Wolf Subject: RE: Duncanville- Metro Bore Importance: High Hailey here is the new address. 534 Holly Dr Duncanville to and here's the phone number 469-510-3177 Our PS said that he has arranged for tomorrow. Process Service Agent Direct Line: 512.358.0062 Direct Fax: 512.382.5702 Corporate Of?ce: 512.892.5700 Ext. 124 'San Antonio Of?ce: 210.369.9030 Toll Free: 855.327.7901 Facsimile: 512.892.5703 NOTICE OF NEW ADDRESS: Please note our new Corporate Office Address: The Legal Connection, Inc., 7103 Oak Meadow, Suite A, Austin, Texas 78736. Our services include: Record Retrieval, Court Reporting, Videography Video Editing, Notary Public, and Process Service. NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail message IS con?dential and intended only for certain recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby noti?ed that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it. From: Hailey Wolf Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 1:47 PM To: Kathy Martinez Subject: Duncanville- Metro Bore Hey Kathy, Let me know if the server goes to another address so I can amend it on my end and get ya?ll the correct version if it is necessary to go to another location. Thanks, Hailey A. Wolf, Esq. General Counsel- Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas 512.463.2088 Hailey Wolf From: Hailey Wolf Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:15 PM To: Kathy Martinez Subject: RE: Invoice from The Legal Connection, Inc. Hey Kathy, Could you please have the server include a blirp about how Rigo aka the Respondent wanted to meet at the address? Something to the effect of At the request of the Respondent, by telephone conversation, ReSpondent was served at Thanks! Hailey A. Wolf, Esq. General Counsel- Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas 512.463.2088 Message-?--? From: Kathy Martinez Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 12:37 PM To: Hailey Wolf Subject: FW: Invoice from The Legal Connection, Inc. Case: RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS VS. METRO BORE . Patient: METRO BORE (Service of Complaint - Ducanville, TX) Please see attachment invoice and return of service for the above-referenced matter. Thank you for your business. The Legal Connection, Inc. 7103 Oak Meadow Dr, Suite A Austin, Texas 78736 512.892.5700; 512.892.5703 Hailey Wolf From: Kathy Martinez Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:16 PM To: Hailey Wolf Subject: RE: Invoice from The Legal Connection, Inc. Yes ma'am will do. Kathy Martinez Process Service Agent Direct Line: 512.358.0062 Direct Fax: 512.382.5702 Corporate Of?ce: 512.892.5700 Ext. 124 San Antonio Of?ce: 210.369.9030 Toll Free: 855.327.7901 Facsimile: 512.892.5703 NOTICE OF NEW ADDRESS: Please note our new Corporate Of?ce Address: The Legal Connection, Inc., 7103 Oak Meadow, Suite A, Austin, Texas 78736. Our services include: Record Retrieval, Court Reporting, Videography 8; Video Editing, Notary Public, and Process Service. NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail message is con?dential and intended only for certain recipients. lfyou are not an intended recipient, you are hereby noti?ed that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it. . From: Hailey Wolf Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:15 PM To: Kathy Martinez Subject: RE: Invoice from The Legal Connection, Inc. Hey Kathy, Could you please have the server include a blirp about how Rigo aka the Respondent wanted to meet at the address? Something to the effect of At the request of the Respondent, by telephone conversation, Respondent was served at Thanks! Hailey A. Wolf, Esq. General Counsel- Enforcement Railroad Commission of Texas 512.463.2088 From: Kathy Martinez Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 12:37 PM To: Hailey Wolf Subject: FW: Invoice from The Legal Connection, Inc. Case: RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS VS. METRO BORE Patient: METRO BORE (Service of Complaint - Ducanville, TX) Please see attachment invoice and return of service for the above-referenced matter. Thank you for your business. The Legal Connection, Inc. 7103 Oak Meadow Dr, Suite A Austin, Texas 78736 512.892.5700; 512.892.5703 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Pipeline System: Waxahachic (Rcagor Springs) Operator: Atmos Energy Corp, Mid-Tex Division Operator ID: 6776 Unit Number: 3387 Activity Number: Location: 113 Arabian Rd, Waxahachie, TX 75165 Date of Occurrence: 2015 Material Released: Natural Gas Quantity: 1,595,000 MCF PHMSA Arrival Time Date: Total Damages S: 5 Unknown Investigation Responsibility: Slate PHMSA NTSB _0lhcr Company Reported Apparent Cause: Company Reported Sub-Cause (from PHMSA Form Corrosion Natural Force Damage Excavation Damage Excavation Damage by Third Party: Excavation Practices Not Sufficient- Failure to verify location by test-hole (pot-holing) Other Outside Force Damage Material Failure (Pipe, Joint, Weld) Equipment Failure Incorrect Operation Other Accident/Incident Resulted in (check all that apply): Comments: Rupture Leak Fire Explosion Evacuation (By Waxahachie FD) Number of Persons: Area: _Rcsidencc.' Homes: 20 Narrative Samar my Short summary of the Inc1denb?Accident scenario On Monday, 21 September 2015, at approximately 8:00 am, a house explosion occurred at 113 Arabian Rd. There Were two injuries as a result of the incident. Subsequent investigation revealed there was a natural gas leak on damaged it} - Inch natural gas service of 112 Arabian Rd caused by Third Party directional boring activity. There were indications that the natural gas migrated into incident property, 113 Arabian Rd, through damaged 4-Inch sewer clean out system caused by Third Party directional boring activity. The server clean out to incident property showed natural gas concentrations of 90.0 percent. The natural gas distribution system is owned and operated by Atmos Energy. Sketches of all surveys, historical records, leak diagrams, etc., were retained by Atmos Energy. Region/State: Region 6/ TX Reviewed by: Principal Investigator: San Sein Title: Pipeline Safety Inspector Date: 20 November 2015 Date: Page 1 of 21 Form -11 Pipellne Failure Investigatlon Report (Rev. 03i1 102011 through Amdt. 192-116 8. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Failure Location if: Response Location (City, Township, Range, 113 Arabian Rd, Waxahachie, TX 75165 Ellis County (Acquire Map] Ili' Address or M.P. on Pipeline: 113 Arabian Rd, Waxahachie, TX 75165 Type of Area (Rural, City): City Coordinates of failure location (Latitude): 32.349240 (Longitude): ~96.784617 Date: 21 September 2015 Time of Failure: Unknown Time Detected: Approx. 8:10 am Time Located: Approx. 8:30 am I-Iow Located: Reported by pipeline locate technician with Heath Consultants (Atmos line locate Contractor) ?News ?29019 Type of Pipeline: Gas Distribution Gas Transmission Hazardous Liquid LNG LP Interstate Gas Interstate Liquid Municipal Intrastate Gas Intrastate Liquid Public Utility Gas Gathering Offshore Liquid Master Meter Offshore Gas Liquid Gathering Offshore Gas - High [-118 Low Stress Liquid HVL Pipeline Con?guration (Regulator Station, Pump Station, Pipeline, etc.): The natural gas distribution system -Waxahachie-Reagor Springs consists of 5.568 miles of main and 140 services. Operator/Own er Information Owner: Atmos Energy Corp, Mid-Tex Division Address: 5420 Freeway, Suite [800 Dallas, TX 75240 Company Of?cial: Jeff Martinez Phone No: 214-316-4680 Fax No: 972-228-6373 Operator: Atmos Energy Corp, Mid-Tex Division Address: 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1800 Dallas, TX 75240 Company Of?cial: Jeff Martinez Phone No. 214-316-4680 Fax No.: 972-228-6373 Drug and Alcohol Testing Program Contacts Ralyn Fletcher 5430 LBJ Freeway, Dallas, TX 75240, 972-855-4084 Ralyn Fletcher 5430 LBJ Freeway, Dallas, TX 75240, 972-855-4084 Drug Program Contact Phone: Alcohol Program Contact Phone: Photo documentation Page 2 of 21 Form -11 Pipel ne Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03l17l2011 through Arndt. 192-116 8. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Damages . Estimated Property Damage Product/Gas Loss or 1,595,000 MCF Unknown {3 - 1 Amount Recovered None Assommed Damages 3 Unknown Estimated Amount 8000.00 Description of Property Damage: The home at 113 Arabian is a one-story house on a concrete foundation. The house is a total loss. The home at 115 Arabian is a two-story house on a concrete foundation. The house is structurally damaged. The home at 111Arabian is a one-story house on a concrete foundation. The house is structurally damaged. The home at 114 Arabian is a one-story house on a concrete foundation. The house is structurally damaged. The home at 112 Arabian is a two-story house on a concrete foundation. The house is structurally damaged. The home at 110 Arabian is a one-story house on a concrete foundation. The house is structurally damaged. Customers out of Service: Yes No Number: 17 Suppliers out of Service: Yes No Number: Fatalities andiInjuries Fatalities: Yes No Company: Contractor: Public: Injuries - Hospitalization: Yes No Company: Contractor: Public: 2 Injuries - Non-HoSpitalization: Yes _No Company: Contractor: Public: Total Injuries (including Non-Hospitalization): Company: Contractor: Public: 2 Yrs. w/ Yrs. Name Job Function Comp. EXP- Type of Injury Drug/Alcohol Testing Were all employees that could have contributed to the incident, post-accident tested within the 2 hour time frame for alcohol or the 32 hour time frame for all other drugs? _Yes _No . Results Job Function Test Date Time Location Type of Drug Pos Neg system Description 1 Initial volume lost or spilled 3 Including cleanup cost Page 3 of 21 Form -11 F'I'pellne Fallure Investigation Report (Rev. 0311 712011 through Amdt. 192-116 8. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report system Description Describe the Operator's System: Atmos records were reviewed to obtain information regarding the operation of the pipeline system. The natural gas distribution system is owned and operated by Atmos Energy Corp. The distribution system has a MAOP of 60 psig. At the time of the incident, the actual operating pressure was approximately 25 psig at the district regulator station. The natural gas main supplying 113 Arabian Rd, incident location is a 2-Inch Polyethylene line located between street curb and incident property line. The main and service were installed in two different phasas. Phase one included 2-Inch PE 2406 Polyethylene main with 10 feet of Inch Polyethylene service stub on 14 December 2006 under the project number: 080.22584. Phase two included 83 feet of Inch Polyethylene service on 11 October 2010 under the service line number: 128494. There were no updates, Services, or changes to the main line or service line since installation. The record indicated an excess flow valve was installation during Phase two of service line installation. The natural gas main supplying 112 Arabian Rd, is a 2-Inch Polyethylene line located betWeen street curb and incident property line. The main and service were installed in two different phases. Phase one included 2-Inch PE 2406 Polyethylene main with 59 feet of Inch Polyethylene service stub on 14 December 2006 under the project number: 080.22584. Phase tw0 included 42 feet of 3/4 Inch Polyethylene service on 19 October 2010 under the service line number: 128952. There were no updates, services, or changes to the main line or service line since installation. The record indicated an excess ?ow Valve was installation during Phase two of service line installation. Pipe Failure Description Length of Failure (inches, feet, miles): Position (Top, Bottom, include position on pipe, 6 O'clock): ?i Description of Failure (Corrosion Gouge, Seam Split): Laboratory Analysis: Yes No Performed by: Preservation of Failed Section or Component: _Yes _No If Yes - Method: In Custody of: Develop a sketch of the area including distances from roads, houses, stress inducing factors, pipe con?gurations, direction of flow, etc. Bar l-lole Test Survey Plot, if included, should be outlined with concentrations at test points. Gomponent Failure Description i - I i j; Component Failed: (I) Manufacturer: Model; Pressure Rating: Size; Other (Breakout Tank, Underground Storage): Pipe Data Material: Wall Thickness-'SDR: Diameter (O.D.): Installation Date: SMYS: Manufacturer: Longitudinal Seam: Type of Coating: Page 4 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i1'ii2011 through Arndt. 192-116 8 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Pipe Data Pipe Speci?cations (API 51., ASTM A53, etc.): Joining . Type: Procedure: NDT Method: Inspected: Yes Pressure@ Time of?'ailure. Failure Site Pressure Failure Site: approx. 25 psig (Excavation Damage . . . by Third Party) Elevation Failure Site. approx. 588 ft. Pressure Readings Various Locations: Direction from Failure Site Location/M.P./Station Pressure (psig) Elevation msl) Upstream 112 Arabian St 25 588 Upstream Pump Station Data Type of Product: API Gravity: Speci?c Gravity: Flow Rate: Pressure Time of Failure Distance to Failure Site: High Pressure Set Point: Low Pressure Set Point: Upstream Compressor Station Data I Speci?c Gravity: Flow Rate: Pressure Time of Failure Distance to Failure Site; High Pressure Set Point: Low Pressure Set Point: Operating Pressure I NXA Max. Allowable Operating Pressure: 60 psig Determination 0f MAOPI Pressure Test Actual Operating Pressure: approx. 25 psig Method of Over Pressure Protection: Relief Valve Relief Valve Set Point: 60 psig Capacity Adequate? Yes No Integrity est A?er Failure . Pressure test conducted in place? (Conducted on Failed Components or Associated Piping): Yes No If No, tested after removal? Yes No Method: 4 Obtain event logs and pressure recording charts Page 5 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i1'ii2011 through Arndt. 192-116 8- 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Integrity Test After Failure Describe any failures during the test. Soil/water Conditions Failure Site Condition of and Type of Soil around Failure Site (Color, Wet, Dry, Frost Depth): Type ofBack?lI (Size and Description): Type of Water (Salt, Brackish): water Analysis Yes NO External Pipe or Gomponent Examination External Corrosion? _Yes No Coating Condition (Disbanded, Non-existent): Description of Corrosion: Description of Failure Surface (Gauges, Arc Burns, Wrinkle Bends, Cracks, Stress Cracks, Chevrons, Fracture Mode, Point of Origin): Above Ground: Yes No Buried: Yes No (1) Stress Inducing Factors: Depth of Cover: Gatho die Protection _X_i (Surface): (Interface): Soil Resistivity: Unknown Date of Installation: Method of Protection: Did the Operator have knowledge of Corrosion before the Incident? Yes No How Discovered? (Close Interval Survey, Instrumented Pig, Annual Survey, Recti?er Readings, ECDA, etc): Internal Pipe or Component Examination I Internal Corrosion: Yes _No i" Injected Inhibitors: _Yes No Type of Inhibitors; Testing: Yes _No Results (Coupon Test, Corrosion Resistance Probe): 5 Attach copy of water analysis report Page 6 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 031712011 through Amdt. 192-116 8. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Internal Pipe or Component Examination 31; MA Description of Failure Surface (MIC, Fitting, Wall Thinning, Chevrons, Fracture Mode, Point of Origin): Cleaning Pig Program: Yes No Gas and/or Liquid Analysis: Yes No Results of Gas and/or Liquid Analysis Internal Inspection Survey: Yes No Results Did the Operator have knowledge of Corrosion before the Incident? Yes No I-Iow Discovered? (Instrumented Pig, Coupon Testing, ICDA, etc.): Outside Force Damage Responsible Party: Telephone No.: (1) Circle Construction, Inc (1) 817-295-0056 (2) Metro Bore (2) 469-223-1261 Address: Scope of Line Locate Request 1572426443 (Ticket-1): Starting at 105 Arabian Rd, mark the street on the west side of the cul de sac towards Saratoga Drive, continue to mark the entire length of Arabian Rd 1575144185 (Ticket-2): Starting at 105 Arabian Rd, mark the street on the west side of the cul de sac towards Saratoga Drive, continue to mark the entire length of Arabian Rd Work Being Perfumed: (1). Underground Utilities (2). Installing fiber optic cable Equipment Involved: Directional boring Equipment Called One Call System? Yes No One Call Name: One Call Report (I) TX 811 (1) 1572426443 (Ticket-1) (2) TX 811 (2) 1575144185 (Ticket-2) 6 Attach copy of gas and/or liquid analysis report 7 Attach copy of internal inspection survey report 8 Attach copy of one-call report Page 7 of 21 Form -1?l Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03l17i2011 through Arndt. 192-416 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Outside Force Damage Notice Date: Time: (1) 08/12/15 (Ticket-1) (1) 12:47 (2) 09/08/15 (Ticket-2) (2) 14:53 Response Date: Positive ReSponse to Excavator Time: (1) 8/22/2015 (Ticket-1) (1) 9:40:05 AM (2) 9/19/2015 (Ticket-2) (2) 8:55:10 AM Details of Response: Atmos line locate requests history was reviewed and 2 locate tickets along 100 of Arabian Rd., Waxahachie, Texas were found. Ticket 1: 1572426443 ws requested by Circle Construction, Inc. Atmos records con?rmed that the entire scope of line locate request had been marked and completed on 8/22/2015. Ticket 2: 1575144185 was requested by Metro Bore. Atmos records con?rmed that the line locate request of 105 Arabian Rd had been marked and completed on 9/19/2015. In both locate requests, Atmos failed to provide positive responses within 48 hours after the time the excavators had given to the noti?cation system the intent to excavation. Was Location Marked According to Procedures? Yes No Pipeline Marking Type: ?1 Location: ?1 Atmos records for Ticket-1 &Ticket-2 showed Ticket-1: Paint and Flag on 8/22/2015 that requested work locations had been painted Ticket-2: Paint and Flag on 9/19/2015 and flagged by line locators on 8/22/2015 and 9/19i2015, respectively. During the incident investigation on 21 September 2015, paint markings were visible on the street for marking of natural gas service line to 112 Arabian Rd. The paint markings were located in an approximate centerline of an underground pipeline. State Law Damage Prevention Program Followed? Yes No No State Law In both locate requests, Atmos failed to provide positive responses within 48 hours after the time the excavators had given to the noti?cation system of the intent to excavation. During the incident investigation, there was no evidence that excavator had exercised reasonable care necessary to prevent damaging underground pipeline in or near the excavation area. The excavator failed to verify the location of a Polyethylene Service line tolerance zone. It is required that non-invasive methods be considered when excavation is to take place within the speci?c tolerance zone per TAC RULE ?18.10. Tolerance zone is de?ned as half the nominal diameter of the underground pipeline plus a minimum of 18 inches on either side of the outside edge of the underground pipeline on a horizontal plane. Notice Required: _X_ch Response Required: Yes No Was Operator Member of State One Call? Yes Was Operator on Site? Yes No Page 8 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03/17/2011 through Arndt. 192-116 195-95). Pipeline Failure investigation Report Outside Force Damage No Did a de?ciency in the Public Awareness Program contribute to the accident? _mYes No Is OSHA Noti?cation Required? Yes No Natural Forces i I Description (Earthquake, Tornado, Flooding, Erosion): Failure Isolation Squeeze Off/Stopple Location and Method: Squeezed Off 2-Inch natural gas main at the southwest corner of Arabian and Thoroughbred St intersection. It was approximately located 249 feet from damaged 3/4 Inch Polyethylene service line of 112 Arabian Rd. Valve Closed - Upstream: I.D.: Time: MR: NRA Valve Closed - I.D.: Time: M.P.: NJA Pipeline Shutdown Method: Manual Automatic SCADA Controller ESD Failed Section Bypassed or Isolated: Isolated Performed By: Atmos Energy Spacing: Odorization Gas Odorized: Yes No Concentration of Odorant (Post Incident at Failure Site): 0.17 percentage of gas in air Method of Determination: Yes No 9% LEL: Yes No Gas In Air: Yes _No Heath'OdOTator Time Taken: Yes No 11:45 am Was Odorizer Working Prior to the Incident? Type of Odorizer (Wick, By-Pass): Yes _No Liquid Injection Odorant Manufacturer: YZ Industries Type of Odorant: Captan Model: 8300 Amount Injected: See Below Monitoring Interval (Weekly): Odorization History (Leaks Complaints, Low Odorant Levels, Monitoring Locations, Distances from Failure Site): Atmos records indicated the last odorant concentration test was performed on 09/17/2015 with threshold reading of 0.17% gas?in-air concentration and readily detectable reading of 0.87% gas-in-air concentration. The odorant test was performed at to M11 Junction, CR200 (DC-16716) approximately 2.0 miles from Reagor Springs measuring station. On 21 September 2015, at approximately. 11:45 am, an Atmos Technician performed an odorant test at the service riser of 216 Thoroughbred St. The threshold reading was 0.17% gas-in-air and readily detectable reading was 1.0% gas-in-air, Page 9 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i17i2011 through Arndt. 192-116 8- 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Odorizatian NIA Waxahachie Fire Department personnel at the incident location and RRC Inspectors witnessed the test. Leak Investigation Orders (LIO's) were reviewed from 1 September 2015 through 21 September 2015 in the 100 oi Arabian Rd. Atmos records indicated that there had been no LIOs reported during that time in the 100 Arabian Rd. The most recent L10 to 113 Arabian Rd was created on the day of the incident reporting the incident to Atmos. The Waxahachie (Reagor Springs) distribution receives odorized gas from an odorant injection points as listed below: Odorizer No 1 Chambers Measuring Station; Dated 21 September 2015; Injection Rate 0.789 MMCF Odorizer No 1 - Chambers Measuring Station; Dated 31 August 2015; Injection Rate 0.789 MMCF Odorizer No 1 - Chambers Measuring Station; Dated 20 July 2015; Injection Rate 0.818 MMCF Weather Conditions MA Temperature: Wind (Direction Speed): 21 September 2015: 94/66 21 September 2015: 5 North Climate (Snow, Rain): Humidity: None 21 September 2015: 91% Was Incident preceded by a rapid weather change? Yes No Weather Conditions Prior to Incident (Cloud Cover, Ceiling Heights, Snow, Rain, Fog): Dry soil condition Gas Migration .9qu r?u- Bar Hole Test of Area: Yes No Equipment Uscd: CGI (Combustible Gas Indicator) and RMLD (Remote Methane Leak Detector) Method of Survey (Foundations, Curbs, Manholcs, Driveways, Mains, Services) i? The natural gas service line and main to 113 Arabian Rd were bar-hole CGI tested and no natural gas concentrations were found. However, the natural gas reading of 90 percent was detected at sewer clean outline of 113 Arabian Rd. The incident location and soil around the structure could not be bar-hole CGI tested due to scatter debris. Upon continued leak surveying the main and services along 100 of Arabian Rd, 100.0 percent natural gas reading was discovered at 112 Arabian Rd natural gas service line. The leaking service line was located approximately 80-lnches from 113 Arabian Rd sewer clean out line. The following natural gas readings were recorded by Atmos during sewer clean out survey. 115Arabian Rd 90.0 percent 117Arabian Rd 87.0 percent 116 Arabian Rd 80.0 percent 114 Arabian Rd 77.0 percent 112 Arabian Rd 3.0 percent On 21 September 2015, Atmos conducted RMLD Special leak survey of Map Number-Saddle B. The special survey included 34,788 feet of main and 140 services. No additional natural gas leaks were found. Atmos retained records of all bar-hole tests and seWer check data. 9 Plot on site description page Page 10 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03l17!2011 through Amdt. 193416 a 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Gas Migration Survey nvironitteut Sensitivity 1:31th I Location (Nearest Rivers, Body of Water, Marshlands, Wildlife Re?ige, City Water Supplies that could be or were affected ?1 by the medium loss): OPA Contingency Pian Available? Yes No Followed? Yes No Glass Location/High Consequence Area Ni A Class Location: 1 2_ 3 4 HCA Area? Yes No Determination: Residential Distribution Determination: Odorization Required? Yes No Pressure Test Histon (Expand List as Req'd ?O?Assessment . Pressure Duration Deadline Date Test Date Test Medium (psig) (hrs) an SMYS Installation NIA 22 Oct 2010 Air 124 10 MA Next 12 Oct 2010 Air 120 10 MA Next Most Recent Describe any problems experienced during the pressure tests. Installation pressure test record indicated to be applicable to the main and Service line. Internal Line Inspection/Other Assessment History (Expand List as Necessary) Req'd Assessment Assessment Type of 11.1 Other Assessment Indicated Anomaly Deadline Date Date Tool Method If yes, describe below Initial Yes No Next Yes No Next Yes No Most Recent Yes No 10 As required of Pipeline Integrity Management regulations in 49CFR Parts 192 and 195 11 MFL, TF1, UT, Combination, Geometry, etc. 12 ECDA, ICDA, SCCDA, ?other technology," etc. Page 11 of 21 Fonn -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03t17i2011 through Amdt. 192-116 8? 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Internal Line Inspection/Other Assessment History {Expand List as Necessary) Describe any previously indicated anomalies at the failed pipe, and any subsequent pipe inspections (anomaly digs) and remedial actions. Pro-Failure Conditions and Actions I Was there a known pro-failure condition requiring the operator to schedule evaluation and remediation? Yes (describe below or on attachment) No If there was such a known pre-failure condition, had the operator established and adhered to a required evaluation and remediation schedule? Describe below or on attachment. Yes No Prior to the failure, had the operator performed the required actions to address the threats that are now known to be related to the cause of this failure? Yes No List below or on an attachment such operator-identi?ed threats1 and operator actions taken prior to the accident. Describe any previously indicated anomalies at the failed pipe, and any subsequent pipe inspections (anomaly digs) and remedial actions. Maps J: Records . . . . I - Are Maps and Records Current? Yes No Comments: The map survey sheet for the incident (113 Arabian Rd) is located in Map Sheet ML04H. Leak Survey History I Leak Survey History (Trend Analysis, Leak Plots): Map Sheets Compliance History is detailed below. Inspector Pipe Main Num. Of Survey Date Desc. Type Footage Services Type Completed ML-04 CS 5196 0 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04A CS 4684 0 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04B CS 1241 0 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04C CS 5474 0 LSA 2/17/2014 CS 606 0 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04E CS 3448 0 LSA 2/17/2014 P2 1778 0 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04F P2 7228 85 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04G P2 3407 27 LSA 2/17/2014 ML-04H P2 1726 28 LSA 2/17/2014 l3 Obtain copies of maps and records Page 12 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03/17/2011 through Amdt. 192-116 195-95) Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Leak Survey History NXA The last scheduled leak survey for NIL-04H showed there were no leaks found at 113 Arabian Rd or 112 Arabian Rd. Atmos conducted a RMLD leak survey on section of Map Number: ML-04H post-incident on 21 September 2015. One leak was found during the survey at 112 Arabian Rd and graded as hazardous leak. Atmos record showed the hazardous leak was documented as Grade-1, Leak number: 543844. Pipeline Operation History Description (Repair or Leak Reports, Exposed Pipe Reports): Records showed that Leak Number: 543844 at 112 Arabian Rd was found on 21 September 2015 on the service tap and permanently repaired 21 September 2015. Leak was approximately located 80 inches north of damaged sewer clean out line of 113 Arabian Rd. The leak was discovered at 1% Inch Polyethylene service. The repaired leak history was reviewed for 112 and 113 Arabian Rd. 0n 1 September 2010, a hazardous natural gas leak Was repaired on 113 Arabian Rd. Atmos record showed the hazardous leak was documented as Grade-1, Leak number: 473842. Did a Safety Related Condition Exist Prior to Failure? Yes No Reported? Yes No Unaccounted For Gas: Waxahachie (Reagor Springs) is part of the Waxahachie distribution system Lost and Unaccounted For Gas report. The 12?month reporting period for June ending 2015 shows approximately 2.56%. Over Short/Line Balance (24 hr., Weekly, rend): Operator/Contractor Error I N211 Name: Job Function: Title: Years of Experience: Training (Type of Training. Background): Was the person ?Operator Qualified" as applicable to a precursor abnormal operating condition? _Yes No Was quali?ed individual suspended ??om performing covered task Yes No Type of Error (Inadvertent Operation of :1 Valve): Procedures that are required: Actions that were taken: Pre-Job Meeting (Construction, Maintenance, Blow Down, Purging, Isolation): Prevention of Accidental Ignition (Tag Lock Out, Hot Weld Permit): Page 13 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Invest-gallon Report (Rev. 031171'2011 through Amdt. 192-116 8. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Operator/Gan tractor Error Procedures conducted for Accidental Ignition: Was a Company Inspector on the Job? Yes No Was an Inspection conducted on this portion of the job? Yes No Additional Actions (Contributing factors may include number of hours at work prior to failure or time of day work being conducted): Training Procedures: Operation Procedures: Controller Activities: Years Hours on Duty Shi? Name Tnle Experience Prior to Failure Alarm Parameters: Hi git/Low Pressure Shutdown: Flow Rate: Procedures for Clearing Alarms: Type of Alarm: Company Response Procedures for Abnormal Operations: Over/Short Line Balance Procedures: Frequency of Over/Short Line Balance: Additional Actions: Page 14 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 031171'2011 through Amdt. 192-116 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Additional Actions Taken lay-the Operator Make notes regarding the emergency and Failure Investigation Procedures (Pressure reduction, Reinforced Squeeze Off, Clean Up, Use of Evacuators, Line Purging, closing Additional Valves, Double Block and Bleed, Continue Operating Pumps): 0n the date of the incident, Atmos Technicians conducted bar-hole testing along the customer gas service lines of 112 and 113 Arabian Rd, along the gas main between the street and property line and at sewer traps. The damaged gas service line caused by Third Party directional here to 112 Arabian Rd was repaired. Additionally, a section of damaged gas service line from 112 Arabian Rd and a section of damaged sewer clean out line from 113 Arabian Rd were also remoVed by Atmos?s-lndependent Investigator (Baker Engineering Risk Consultants, Inc). Baker Engineering Risk Consultants, Inc. is also investigating on behalf of Atmos. Atmos continued to monitor post incident and found a residual gas readings along city sewer pipeline system. The post monitoring of City Sewer system was completed on 25 September 2015 until no further detection of natural gas concentration. Atmos vacuum excavated the areas where a Third Party directional bore crossed to their natural gas service lines and sewer clean out line of 113 Arabian Rd. The crossing locations were 116 114 Arabian Rd, 112 Arabian Rd and 110 Arabian Rd. The visual inspection indicated that only a Inch Polyethylene gas service line of 112 Arabian Rd and a 4- Inch sewer clean out line crossings were damaged by Third Party directional bore activity. On 22 September 2015, Atmos air pressure tested the natural gas main and services along 100 BLK of Arabian Rd. The pipeline system was tested to 125 psig for 1 hour. No leaks or pressure drop were reported. Photo Documentation Overall Area from best possible view. Pictures from the four points of the compass. Failed Component, Operator Action, Damages in Area, Address Markings, etc. Photo Photo NO- Description No. Description 1 See Photo Pages Attached Page 15 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i17i2011 through Amdt. 192-116 a 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Camera Type: Page 16 of 21 Form -11 peline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03f1712011 through Amdt. 192-116 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Additional infonnaiion Sources Agency Name Title Phone Number Police: Fire Dept.: State Fire Marshal]: State Agency: RRC ?San Sein Pipeline Safety Inspector 817-882-8966 NTSB: EPA: USCG: FBI: ATF: OSHA: Insurance Co.: FRA: MMS: Television: Newspaper: Other: Persons Interyiewed Title Phone Number Page 17 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i17i2011 through Arndt. 192-116 195-95) Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Event Log Sequence of events prior, during, and after the incident by time. (Consider the events of all parties involved in the incident, Fire Department and Police reports, Operator Logs and other govemment agencies.) Time I Date Event 8:10 AM I 21 Sep Atmos Field Supervisor was called by Line Locator at Heath 8:12 AM I 21 Sep Atmos Operation Supervisor was noti?ed and sent crew en route Before I Fire Department shut off gas at approximately 10 meters 21 Sep -9:00 Atmos Technicians probing sewer and soil presence of gas AM I 21 Sep 9:00 AM I 21 Sep Called RRC to report incident. ~9:30 Atmos Technicians continued to shut off gas at meter AM I 21 Sep 9:00 AM I 21 Sep Atmos Technicians found gas readings in sewer and in the yard of 113 Arabian Rd 9:00 AM I 21Sep Atmos Construction crew located main to identin place to dig to squeeze main 9:00 Atmos set up a perimeter, assisted with evacuation, and continued to monitor gas readings from probes AM IZlSep of soil and sewer 9:30 AM I21 Sep Construction crew began digging to main to apply squeeze tool 9:59 AM I21 Sep RRC Inspector arrived onsite 10:08 AMI 21 Squeezed the 2 Inch main that supply gas t0100 Block of Arabian Rd to dead end Sep 10:09 Atmos Technicians continue probing sewer and soil for prescnce of gas AM I21 Sep 11:00 AM I 21 Gas reading were back down to zero in the seWer cleanouts and in the yard of 113 Arabian Rd Sep 4:30 PMI 21 Sep Baker Engineering Risk Consultants arrived on scene to conduct a third-party investigation 4:45 PMIZI Sep Atmos hand digging the damaged line and exposed the damaged service line 10:00 PM [21 Sep 2 Inch main was capped off 7:50 AM I 22 Sep RRC Inspector arrived onsite. 7:55 AM I22 Sep Atmos tested the service for 112 Arabian Rd, the damaged line, and it held pressure test 10:55 AM I 22 Tested the 2 Inch main until 12:05 PM, it held a pressure test by chart recorder Sep 2:00 22 Sep Started back?lling excavations 2:15 PMIZZ Sep Gas was back on to main and services 2:35 PMI22 Sep Gas was purged from line 6:00 PM Relights began for the affected customers on 100 Block of Arabian Rd Page 18 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03I17I2011 through Amdl. 192-116 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Event?Log. I. . Sequence of events prior, during, and after the incident by time. (Consider the events of all parties involved in the incident, Fire and Police or Lo and other vernment 23 Sep 2015 to 20 RRC Inspector Mr. Sein began to examine records and continue investigations and complete the Nov 2015 inv tion rt Page 19 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i1712011 through Amdt. 192-116 a. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report Investigation contact Log Name Description Joshua Lenamond Operations Supervisor, Atmos Energy John Pearson Operations Supervisor, Atmos Energy Pete Pedersen Compliance Manager, Atmos Energy Failure Investigation Docum aeration Log Operator: Atmos Energy Inc., Mid-Tex Division Unit NIA CPF NM 21361:? 2 MM Appendix Documentation Description Date FOIA Number Received Yes No MA NOTE: Opcrutm records are leased and used to complete the report, but are not retained. TAC Supplemental Odorization Form 8 Photo Pages Page 20 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 031712011 through Amdt. 192-116 8. 195-95). Pipeline Failure Investigation Report needed in any area of this guideline. Site Description Provide a sketch of the area including distances from roads, houses, stress inducing factors, pipe con?gurations, etc. Bar Hole Test Survey Plot should be outlined with concentrations at test points. Photos should be taken from all angles with each photo documented. Additional areas may be Driveway of 113 Arabian Rd. 1/ sidewalk Gas Um: Sewage: Clean Oul Location at line damage - Direct-ind Bose 3:81;: I I ans: Arabian RD. 9 DRAMNG NOT TO SCALE Page 21 of 21 Form -11 Pipeline Failure Investigation Report (Rev. 03i17i2011 through Amdt. 192-115 a. 195-95). exceed as provided in 49 USC 60122. NOTICE: This report is required by 49 CFR Part 191. Failure to report can result in a civil penalty not to exceed 100.000 for each violation tor each day that such violation persists except that the maximum civil penalty shall not OMB NO: 2137-0522 EXPIRATION DATE: 10i31l?2016 Original Report Data, 10r19r2015 us Department of Transportation No. 20150096- 16193 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (DOT Use Only) INCIDENT REPORT - GAS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM of Pipeline Safety 1200 New Jersey Avenue. SE. Washington. 0.8. 20590. 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 oi the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Numbe The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2137-0522. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send comments regarding the burden or any other aspect at this collection of information. including suggestions for reducing the burden to: Information Collection Clearance Of?cer. PHMSA. Of?ce important: Please read the separate instructions for completing this form befOre you begin. They clarity the information requested and provide speci?c examples. it you do not have a copy of the instructions. you can obtain one from the PHMSA Pipeline Safety Community Web Page at I II yr!? it PART A - KEY REPORT IN FORMATION Report Type: (select all that apply) original: sunptgenm: Last Revision Date 11l11i2015 1. Operator?s OPS-issued Operator Identi?cation Number (OPID): 31348 2. Name of Operator ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION - MID-TEX 3. Address of Operator: Sa. Street Address 5420 LBJ FREEWAY. SUITE 1800 Response Center: 3b. Clty DALLAS Sc. State Texas 3d. Zip Code 75240 4. Local time (24-hr clock) and date of the Incident: 09l21l2015 03:00 5. Location of Incident: 5a. Street Address or location description 113 Arabian Road 5b. City Waxahachie 5c. County or Parish Ellis 5d. State: Texas 5e. Zip Code: 75165 St. Latitude: 32.34912 Longitude: -96.?8448 6. National Response Center Report Number: 1129019 7. Local time {24-hr clock) and date of initial telephonic report to the National 09l21l2015 09:00 B. Incident resulted from: Unintentional release of gas 9. Gas released: Natural Gas - Other Gas Released Name: 10. Estimated volume of gas released - Thousand Cubic Feet (MCF): 1.595.000 11 . Were there fatalities? No - If Yes. specify the number in each category: 11a. Operator employees 11b. Contractor employees working for the Operator 11c. Non-Operator emergency responders 11d. Workers working on the tight-of-way, but NOT associated with this Operator 113. General public 11f. Total fatalities (sum of above) 12. Were there injuries requiring inpatient hospitalization? Yes - If Yes. specify the number in each category: 123. Operator employees 12b. Contractor employees working for the Operator 120. Non-Operator emergency responders GOOD 12d. Werkers working on the right-of-way. but NOT associated with this Operator 12e. General public 121'. Total injuries (sum of above) NM 13. Was the pipelinelfacility shut down due to the incident? Yes - If No. Explain: - If Yes. complete Questions 13a and 13b: (use local time. 24-hr clock} Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 1 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted 13a. Local time and shutdown: 09:21:261?5 10:08 13b. Local time pipelineifacility restarted: 09/232015 14:15 - Still shutdown? Supplemental Report Required) 14. Did the gas ignite? No 15. Did the gas explode? Yes 16. Number of general public evacuated: 20 17. Time sequence (use local time. 24-hour clock}: 17a. Local time operator identi?ed Incident - effective 10-2014. "Incident" changed to ?failure? 09i2?li2015 08:10 17b. Local time operator resources arrived on site: 09i21i2015 08:30 PART - ADDITIONAL LOCATION INFORMATION 1. Was the Incident on Federal land? No 2. Location of Incident Private property 3. Area of incident: Underground Specify: Under soil If Other. Describe: Depth of Cover: 30 4. Did incident occur in a crossing? No - If Yes. specify type below: - If Bridge crossing Cased! Uncased: - If Railroad crossing - Cased! Uncased! Boredldrilled - If Road crossing Cased! Uncased! Boredidn'lled - If Water crossing - Cased! Uncased Name of body of water (If commonly known): Approx. water depth PART - ADDITIONAL FACILITY INFORMATION 1. Indicate the type of pipeline system: Privately Owned - If Other. specify: 2. Part of system involved in Incident: Service - If Other. specify: 2a. Year "Part of system involved in Incident? was installed: 2010 3. When ?Main? or "Service" is selected as the "Part of system involved In Incident" (from PART C. Question 2). provide the following: 3a. Nominal diameter of pipe .75 3b. Pipe speci?cation API 5L. ASTM 02513): 2406 SC. Pipe manufacturer: DriscoPlex 3d. Year of manufacture: 2010 4. Material involved in Incident: Plastic - If Other. specify: 4a. If Steel. Specify seam type: NoneiUnknown? 4b. If Steel. Specify wall thickness (inches): 4c. If Plastic. Specify type: Polyethylene (PE) - If Other. describe: 4d. If Plastic. Specify Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR): 11 Or wall thickness: 4e. If Polyethylene (PE) is selected as the type of plastic in Part C. Question 4.c: - Specify PE Pipe Material Designation Code (Le. 2406. 3408. 2406 etc.) Unknown? 5. Type of release involved Leak - If Mechanical Puncture - Specify Approx size: Approx. sIZe: in. (axial): in. (circumferential): - If Leak - Select Type: Other - If Other. Describe: 3rd party bored into serv - If Rupture - Select Orientation: - If Other. Describe: Approx. size: (widest opening): (length circumferentially or axially): - If Other - Describe: Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 2 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted PART - ADDITIONAL CONSEQUENCE INFORMATION 1. Class Location of Incident 2. Estimated Property Damage I Class 3 Location 2a. Estimated cost of public and non-Operator private 3 0 property damage paldireimbursed by the Operator effective 6-2011. "paidireimbursed by the Operator? removed Estimated cost of gas released effective 6-2011. moved to item 2f 2b. Estimated cost of Operator?s property damage 8. repairs 5 0 26. Estimated cost of Operator's emergency response 5 0 2d. Estimated other costs 0 - Describe: 2e. Property damage subtotal (sum of above) 3 0 WW 2f. Estimated cost of gas released 5 8.000 Total of all costs 5 8.000 3. Estimated number of customers out of service: 3a. Commercial entities. 0 3b. Industrial entities 0 30. Residences 1? PART - ADDITIONAL OPERATING INFORMATION 1. Estimated pressure at the point and time of the Incident (psig): 25.00 2. Normal Operating pressure at the point and time of the Incident (psig): 25.00 3. Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) at the point and time of 60-00 the Incident (pslg): 4. Describe the pressure on the system relating to the Incident: Pressure did not exceed MAOP 5. Was a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) based system in Yes place on the pipeline or. facility involved In the Incident? - If Yes: 5a Was it operating at the time of the Incident? Yes 5b Was it fully functional at the time of the Incident? Yes 5c. Did SCADA-based information (such as alarm(s). alert(s). No event(s). andfor volume or pack calculations) assist with the detection of the Incident? 5d. Did SCADA-based information (such as alarm(s). alert(s). No event(s), andlor volume calculations) assist with the con?rmation of the Incident? 6. How was the Incident initially Identified for the Operator? Noti?cation From Public - If Other. Specify: 6a. If "Controller". "Local Operating Personnel. Including contractors". ?Air Patrol". or "Ground Patrol by Operator or its contractor" is selected In Question 6. specify. 7. 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 Operator did not find that an Investigation of the controller(s) actions or control room issues was necessary dur 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:" (provide an explanation for why the operator did not investigate) Damage was due to 3rd party. no controller issues were present - If Yes. Specify investigation result(s) (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. andior controller response Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 3 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted - Investigation identi?ed areas other than those above Describe: PART - DRUG ALCOHOL TESTING INFORMATION 1. As a result of this Incident. were any Operator employees tested under the post-accident drug and alcohol testing requirements of Drug 8. Alcohol Testing regulations? No - If Yes: 1a. How many were tested: 1b. How many failed: 2. As a result of this Incident. were any Operator contractor employees tested under the post-accident drug and alcohol testing requirements of Drug 8. Alcohol Testing regulations? No - ltYes: 2a. How many were tested: 2b. How many failed: PART - CAUSE INFORMATION Select only one box from PART in shaded column on left representing the Apparent Cause of the incident. and answer the questions on the right. Describe secondary. contributing, or root causes of the incident in the narrative (PART H). Apparent Cause: (33 - Excavation Damage 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. Specify: 2. Type of corrosion: - Galvanic - Atmospheric - Stray Current - Microbiological - Selective Seam - Other - If Other. Describe: 3. The type(s) of corrosion selected in Question 2 is based on the following: - Field examination - Determined by metallurgical analysis - Other - If Other. Describe: 4. Was the failed item buried under the ground? - If Yes: 4a. Was failed item considered to be under cathodic protection at the time of the Incident? - If Yes. Year protection started: 4b. Was shielding. tenting. or disbonding of coating evident at the point of the incident? 40. Has one or more Cathodic Protection Survey been conducted at the point of the incident? 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: 4d. Was the failed item externally coated or painted? 5. Was there observable damage to the coating or paint in the vicinity of the corrosion? 6. Pipeline coating type. if steel pipe is involved: - If Other. Describe: - if Internal Corrosion: 7. Results of visual examination: - If Other. Describe: 8. Cause of corrosion {select all that apply): - Corrosive Commodity - Water drop-outiAcid - Microbiologil Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 4 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted - Erosion - Other - If Other. Specify: 9. The causeis) of corrosion selected in Question 8 is based on the following: {select all that apply): - Field examination - Determined by metallurgical analysis - Other - if Other. Describe: 10. Location of corrosion (select all that appM: - Low point in pipe - Elbow - Drop-out - Other - lf Other. Describe: 11 . Was the gaslfluid treated with corrosion inhibitor or biocides? 12. Were any liquids found in the distribution system where the Incident occurred? Complete the following if any Corrosion Failure sub-cause is selected AND the ?Part of system involved In incident" (from PART C. Question 2) is Main. Service. or Service Riser. 13. Date of the most recent Leak Survey conducted 14. Has one or more pressure test been conducted since original construction at the point of the Incident? - If Yes: Most recent year tested: Test pressure: 62 - 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 Rainleloods: 1. Specify: - If Other. Specify: If Heavy RainsiFloods: 2. Specify: - If Other. Specify: - If Lightning: 3. Specify: I - If Temperature: 4. Specify: - If Other. Specify: - 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 Incident generated in conjunction with an extreme weather event? 6.a If Yes. specify {select all that apply): - Hurricane - Tropical Storm - Tornado - Other - If Other. Specify: 63 Excavation Damage only one sub-cause can be picked from shaded left-hand column Excavation Damage - Sub-Cause: Excavation Damage by Third Party - It Previous Damage clue to Excavation Activity: Complete the following ONLY iF the ?Part of system involved in Incident" (from Part C. Question 2) is Main. Service. or Service Riser. 1. Date of the most recent Leak Survey conducted 2. Has one or more pressure test been conducted since original construction at the point of the incident? - if Yes: Most recent year tested: Test pressure: Complete the following If Excavation Damage by Third Party is selected. 3. Did the operator get prior noti?cation of the excavation activity? I Yes Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 5 of 9 Reproduction of this form is pennifted 3a. If Yes. Noti?cation received from: {select all that apply): - One-Call System Yes - Excavator - Contractor - Landowner Complete the following mandatory CGA-DIRT Program questions if any Excavation Damage sub-cause ls selected. 4. Do you want PHMSA to upload the following information to CGA-DIRT No .com)? 5. Right-of-Way where event occurred (select all that apply}: - Public - If Public. Specify: - Private Yes - if Private. Specify: Private Landowner - Pipeline PropertyiEasement - PowerlTransmission Line - Railroad - Dedicated Public Utility Easement - Federal Land - Data not collected - UnknownlOther 6. Type of excavator Utility 7. Type of excavation equipment Boring 8. Type of work performed Telecommunications 9. Was the One-Call Center noti?ed? Yes 93. If Yes. specify ticket number: 1575144185 9b. If this is a State where more than a single One-Call Center exists. list Texas 811 the name of the One-Call Center noti?ed: 10. Type of Locator. Contract Locaior 11. Were facility locate marks visible in the area of excavation? Yes 12. Were facilities marked correctly? Yes 13. Did the damage cause an interruption in service? Yes 13a. If Yes. specify duration of the interruption: 24 14. Description of the CGA-DIRT Root Cause (select only the one predominant first level Root Cause and then. where available as a choice. the one predominant second level Root Cause as well): - Root Cause Description: Excavation Practices Not Suf?cient - If One-Call Noti?cation Practices Not Suf?cient. specify: - ll Locating Practices Not Suf?cient. specify: - If Excavation Practices Not Suf?cient. specify: Failure to verify location by test-hold (pot-holing) - If OtherlNone 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 VehiclelEqulpment NOT En aged In Excavation: 1. VehiclelEquipment operated by: - If Damage by Boats. Barges, Drilling Rigs, or Other Maritime Equipment or Vessels Set Adrift or Which l-Iave Otherwise Lost Their Mooring: 2. Select one or more of the following IF an extreme weather event was a factor: - Hurricane - Tropical Stom1 - Tornado - Heavy Rainlelood - Other - If Other. Specify: - It Previous Mechanical Damage NOT Related to Excavation: Complete the following ONLY lF the "Part of system involved in incident? {from Part C. Question 2) is Main. Service. or Service Riser. 3. Date of the most recent Leak Survey conducted: 4. Has one or more pressure test been conducted since original construction at the point of the Incident? - If Yes: Most recent year tested: Test pressure (psig): - If Intentional Damage: 5. Specify: - If Other. Specify: - If Other Outside Force Damage: Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 6 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted 6. Describe: 65 - Pipe. Weldl or Joint Failure - only one sub-cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column Pipe. Weld or Joint Failure - Sub-CauseOther If Butt Weld: - If Other If Fillet Weld: - If Other Describe: Seam: - it Other Describe: if Mechanical the mechanical involved: - if Other Describe: the of - If Other Describe: . Manufacturer: . Year manufactured: . Year 0. . 1. the two materials 11a. First material - If Other 11b. if - If Other 11c. Second material - If Other 11 . If - If Other . 12. If used on plastic pipe. did the ?tting as designed by the manufacturer - restraint? 12a. If Yes - If ion Pitt! 13. 14. Manufacturer: 15. Year manufactured: 16. Year installed: 17. Other attributes: 18. the two materials 18a. First material 13b. If 1 material If 1 . If - Other - If Fusion Joint: 19. - If Other 20. Year installed: 21 . Other attributes: 22. the two materials 22a. First - If Other . Second material - If Other - If Other or Joint Failure: 23. Describe: Form PHMSA 7100.1 Reproduction of this form is permitted Page 7 of 9 Complete the following If any Pipe, Weld, or Jolnt Failure sub-cause is selected. 24. Additional select all that - Dent - Bend - Arc Burn - Crack - Lack of Fusion - Lamination - Buckle - Wrinkle - Burnt 25. Was the Incident a result of: - defect - Material defect - If Other - defect - Previous . Has one or more pressure test been conducted since original construction of the Incident? - If Yes: Most recent Test 66 - Equipment Failure - only one sub-cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column Equipment Failure Sub-Cause: - If Malfunction oi ControiiRelief 1. . - Control Valve - SCADA - Block Valve - Check Valve - Relief Valve - Power Failure - Pressure - Other - if Threaded Connection Failure: 2. - If Non-threaded Connection Failure: 3. - If Other - if Valve: 4. - If Other 4a. Valve 4b. Manufactured 4c. Year manufactured: - if Other Failure: 5. Describe: GT - Incorrect Operation - only one sub-cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column Incorrect Operation Sub-Cause: - it Other Incorrect 1. Describe: Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 8 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted Complete the following if any Incorrect Operation sub-cause ls Selected. 2. Was this Incident related to: (select all that apply) - Inadequate procedure - No procedure established - Failure to follow procedure - Other - If Other. Describe: 3. What category type was the activity that caused the Incident: 4. Was the task(s) that led to the Incident identi?ed as a covered task in your Operator Quali?cation Program? 4a. If Yes. were the individuals performing the task(s) quali?ed for the task(s)? GB - Other Incident Cause - only one sub-cause can be selected from the shaded left-hand column Other Incident Cause Sub-Cause: - if Miscellaneous: 1. Describe: I - If Unknown: 2. Specify: I PART - NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE INCIDENT 3rd party contractor bored in to 314" service. The excavator operated mechanized equipment within the tolerance zone causing damage to a service line which resulted in the release of product. There was evidence that the excavator failed to verify the location of utility lines within the bore path through pothole veri?cation. PART I - PREPARER AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE Preparer?s Name Joshua Lenamond Preparer's Title Operations Supervisor Preparer's Telephone Number 469-261-2303 Preparer's E-mail Address Preparer?s Facsimile Number Authorize Signature's Name Andy Treadway Authorized Signature's Title Compliance Director Authorized Signature's Email Address andy.treadway@atmosenergy.com Form PHMSA 7100.1 Page 9 of 9 Reproduction of this form is permitted i SEecial Investigation Picture ReEort .-. mud-- w: .121 .j Jail-'3'- Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Meter at 113 Arabian Rd its}! 1 Date: September 21, 2915. Description: Start of Excavation at 113 Arabian Rd Special Investi ation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Damaged service line to 112 Arabian Rd. Depth at approximately 30 inches Special Investigation Picture Report Date: September 22, 2015 Description: Calibration information of mechanical pressure recorder (- Special Investi ation Picture Report Date: September 22, 2015 Description: Pressure Recorder recording pressure on log chart . Special Investigation Picture Report .2- Date: September 22, 2015 Description: Pressure for pressure test at 112 Arabian Rd Sgecial Investigation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Directional bore depth Special Investigation Picture Report ?Mum 31m . ?an: w'hsDate: September 21, 2015 Description: Squeeze Point located at western corner of Arabian Rd and Thoroughbred St., on the north side of the 100 block of Arabian Rd Special Investigation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015. Description: Squeeze Point located at western corner of Arabian Rd and Thoroughbred St., on the north side of the 100 block of Arabian Rd Special Investigation Picture Report r?q Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Damage to sewage line for 113 Arabian Rd Special Investi ation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Excavation of tap on main for service to 112 Arabian Rd SEecial Investigation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Removal of Sewer line by City of Waxahachie Special Investigation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Tolerance zone of 112 Arabian Rd gas service line and marking of gas service line Special Investigation Picture ReEort .1- - ru- I Ir ail-r; 1 "us . 1 Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Marking of 112 Arabian Rd gas service line viewing toward 113 Arabian Rd Special Investigation Picture Report Date: September 21, 2015 Description: Tolerance zone of 112 Arabian Rd gas service line and marking of gas service line RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS DAMAGE PREVENTION DOCKET NO. 044847: ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. FOR VIOLATION OF UNDERGROUND PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION COMMISSION RULE 16 TAC and 18.8(a) AT 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), WAXAHACHIE, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS CONSENT ORDER On this the day of 2016, the above-entitled and numbered docket came on for consideration by the Railroad Commission of Texas (?Commission?). The Oversight and Safety Division of the Commission, and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV., through their representatives, have agreed to an informal disposition of the matters under this docket through this Consent Order (?Order?), subject to the approval of the Commission. The Commission has authority to informally dispose of this case through a consent order pursuant to TEX. CODE ANN. 2001 IN SETTLEMENT OF THIS DOCKET, the Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID- TEX DIV. do hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 1. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. is a person who operates, on his or her own behalf, or as an agent designated by the owner, a pipeline containing ?ammable, toxic or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide, as implemented under Title 16, 18.2 of the Texas Administrative Code. 2. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. is a ?person? as that term is de?ned in Title 16, 18.2(16) of the Texas Administrative Code. 3. The Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. agree that the alleged violations, as set forth in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847, regarding 16 TAC and 18.8(a) on September 21, 2015, at 112 ARABIAN RD (THOROUGHBRED), Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas, are hereby settled and compromised under the terms of this Order. 4. The alleged violations by ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. constitute an alleged violation of a safety standard or rule relating to the prevention of damage to facilities containing ?ammable, toxic, or corrosive gas, a hazardous liquid, or carbon dioxide. 5. There is no evidence that the alleged violations of 16 TAC 18.5(a) and 18.8(a) were a proximate cause, contributing cause or a cause in fact of the damage to the gas service line at 112 Arabian Road and/or the explosion at 113 Arabian Road, Waxahachie, Ellis County, Texas. 6. Neither this Order, nor any written or oral offer of settlement related thereto, nor any statement contained therein shall constitute evidence or an admission or adjudication of: 10. 11. 12. 13. (A) any fact or conclusion of law alleged in or relating to Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847; (B) any violation of any statute, rule or regulation or other wrongdoing or misconduct on the part of ATMOS ENERGY CORR, DIV. or any director, of?cer, agent, employee, contractor or af?liate thereof. The Commission and ATMOS ENERGY CORR, DIV. wish to further the goal of safe operations of earth movement activities near pipelines containing ?ammable, toxic or corrosive gas, hazardous liquids, or carbon dioxide, within the State of Texas. The Commission has considered any history of previous violations by ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV., the seriousness of any alleged violation, and any hazard to the health or safety of the public, and has determined that the facts of this case warrant an informal disposition of the Commission?s concerns under the terms of this Order. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. has elected not to avail itself of the opportunity for public hearing. The Commission has jurisdiction to assess an administrative penalty against ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. pursuant to Sections 121.206 and 121.207 of the Texas Utilities Code. An administrative penalty in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS shall be recovered by the Commission for the alleged violations asserted against ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. has placed into the possession of the Commission, funds in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS for deposit in the General Revenue Fund, as payment of the administrative penalty assessed in Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847. The person signing hereunder for ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. has authority to represent ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. in this matter. Jurisdiction of this docket having been established and an agreement of the parties having been reached, it is, therefore, ORDERED by the Railroad Commission of Texas that ATMOS ENERGY CORR, MID-TEX DIV. be assessed an administrative penalty in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS and that Damage Prevention Docket No. 044847 be informally disposed of by the Consent Order and closed. All relief not granted in this Order is DENIED. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS (Order approved and signatures af?xed by Master hJ