Underground Natural Gas Storage Evidence Assurance
Verify your UGS procedures against API RP 1170 and API RP 1171.
Kataba helps storage operators compare current O&M procedures with applicable requirements, trace every finding to its source, and identify missing, conflicting, or outdated evidence before expert approval.
Limited corpus. Pre-agreed deliverables. Human review. No autonomous compliance decisions.
Updated standards. Existing procedures. One difficult question: what changed, and did we cover it?
PHMSA incorporated the second editions of API RP 1170 and API RP 1171 into 49 CFR Part 192, effective January 1, 2026. For operators, the work extends beyond reading the standards. Applicable requirements must be traced into procedures, responsibilities, records, and evidence.
API RP 1170
Design and operation of solution-mined salt caverns used for natural gas storage.
API RP 1171
Functional integrity of natural gas storage in depleted hydrocarbon and aquifer reservoirs.
A cited answer can still miss the record that matters.
General-purpose search and RAG answer from the material they retrieve. A citation shows that an answer has support, but it does not prove that the complete evidence set was considered.
General document AI
- Retrieves passages related to the question
- Produces an answer from what it found
- Cites the returned text
- May not reveal that another required record was never retrieved
Kataba UGS evidence workflow
- Begins with the evidence expected for the UGS question
- Accounts for each required procedure, limit, record, response, and version
- Separately identifies present, missing, stale, and conflicting evidence
- Returns
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCEwhen the available record cannot support a clean conclusion - Routes the result to the responsible expert for review
A citation demonstrates support. Kataba tests whether the available evidence is complete enough for an expert to rely on.
From fragmented records to a reviewable UGS evidence package.
Assemble the authorized corpus
Bring together licensed standards supplied by the customer, O&M procedures, integrity-management documents, inspection records, well files, approved database exports, and other relevant evidence.
Recover legacy information
Use OCR, table extraction, and handwriting recognition to make scanned reports, historical well files, forms, maps, and handwritten records searchable.
Low-confidence extractions remain linked to the original page and are flagged for human verification.
Map requirements to evidence
Connect each customer-defined requirement or review question to the applicable procedure, document version, operating limit, record, and supporting source.
Review the exceptions
Present missing evidence, partial coverage, conflicting values, stale versions, and unresolved interpretations for expert disposition.
Kataba combines semantic/vector retrieval with exact keyword search so technical concepts, identifiers, well names, document references, and exact terminology can all be found.
The output is a gap matrix, not another chatbot transcript.
Illustrative output — not an assessment of any actual operator or facility.
| Requirement reference | Procedure coverage | Procedure citation | Supporting evidence | Gap or conflict | Reviewer status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UGS-1171-R014 (illustrative) | Covered | OM‑Manual‑114, §6.3, Rev. 2024‑03 | Pressure-monitoring log, Well Pad 7, 2023–2025 | None identified | Covered |
| UGS-1170-R022 (illustrative) | Partially covered | Cavern‑Integrity‑SOP‑08, §3.1, Rev. 2021‑11 | Mechanical integrity test results, Cavern C‑3, 2022 | Referenced interval test not repeated after 2022 workover | Partially covered |
| UGS-1171-R031 (illustrative) | Unsupported | Emergency‑Response‑Plan‑02, §5, Rev. 2019‑06 | No drill record located for named facility | Required response-drill frequency not evidenced | Unsupported |
| UGS-1170-R040 (illustrative) | Conflicting evidence | Wellhead‑Monitoring‑SOP‑11, §4.4, Rev. 2020‑02; Facility‑Handbook‑03, §2.9, Rev. 2023‑08 | Two procedures specify different pressure thresholds | Threshold values do not match between documents | Conflicting evidence |
| UGS-1171-R052 (illustrative) | Review required | Corrosion‑Monitoring‑Plan‑05, §7.2, Rev. 2022‑09 | Inspection log referenced but not located in corpus | Cited record could not be verified in available evidence | Review required |
- Requirement-to-procedure crosswalk
- Exact source citations
- Missing and conflicting evidence log
- Document-version analysis
- Reviewer comments and disposition
- Exportable evidence package
Start with one defined workflow.
API RP 1170/1171 procedure gap analysis
Compare applicable requirements with current procedures and identify covered, partial, ambiguous, or unsupported areas.
Acquisition and legacy-field evidence assessment
Recover and organize historical well, plugging, completion, integrity, and operating information from databases, scanned files, and handwritten records.
Audit and inspection evidence assembly
Connect inspection questions to applicable procedures, operating limits, monitoring records, responses, and source evidence.
Designed for the operator’s security boundary.
Kataba can be configured for a controlled deployment in which document access, model access, user permissions, and integrations are aligned with the operator’s IT and cybersecurity requirements.
- Deployment boundary — cloud, private-cloud, or on-premises — scoped to the operator's environment
- Document and model access scoped to named reviewers
- Integration and connector needs assessed against the operator's existing systems
- Access control, logging, and encryption requirements reviewed with the operator's IT and security teams
- Data-retention terms agreed before any corpus is loaded
Specific deployment, access-control, and infrastructure options are confirmed with each operator during scoping and are not represented here as pre-built, universally available features.
Prove the workflow on one bounded matter.
The first engagement is deliberately limited so the operator can evaluate accuracy, usefulness, security, and reviewer acceptance before considering broader deployment.
Proposed scope
- One procedure family or completed historical workflow
- One facility or operating entity
- Limited, approved corpus
- Predefined requirements or 10–15 review questions
- Named operator reviewers
- No production write access
Deliverables
- Source-linked gap matrix
- Coverage and insufficiency classifications
- Missing, stale, and conflicting evidence log
- Reviewer-ready findings package
- Recommendations for a broader deployment, if justified
Acceptance criteria agreed before work begins
- Required-record or requirement recall
- Citation accuracy
- Correct document-version identification
- Unsupported or false-clean conclusions
- Reviewer acceptance
- Evidence-assembly time compared with the current process
Acceptance thresholds are agreed with the operator. They are POC targets, not claims of previously proven performance.
Choose one UGS workflow worth testing.
Tell us which procedure, facility, acquired asset, or historical evidence problem would make a useful bounded evaluation.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between API RP 1170 and API RP 1171?
API RP 1170 addresses the design and operation of solution-mined salt caverns used for natural gas storage. API RP 1171 addresses the functional integrity of natural gas storage in depleted hydrocarbon and aquifer reservoirs. Both were incorporated into 49 CFR Part 192 by PHMSA, effective January 1, 2026.
How does Kataba support procedure gap analysis?
Kataba connects each applicable requirement or review question to your operating procedures, document versions, and supporting records, then separately classifies present, missing, stale, and conflicting evidence so a reviewer can see exactly where a procedure is supported and where it is not.
Can Kataba work with scanned and handwritten records?
Yes. Kataba uses OCR, table extraction, and handwriting recognition to make scanned reports, historical well files, forms, and maps searchable. Low-confidence extractions stay linked to the original page and are flagged for human verification.
Can Kataba connect to databases and existing repositories?
Database and repository connections are scoped per engagement based on the operator's systems and requirements. During a bounded POC, Kataba typically works from an approved export or a defined access point agreed with the operator in advance.
Does Kataba determine whether an operator is compliant?
No. Kataba organizes and tests the available evidence, identifies gaps and conflicts, and supports expert review. Regulatory and engineering determinations remain with the operator’s authorized personnel and advisors.
Can Kataba be deployed on premises?
Deployment options, including on-premises or private-cloud configurations, are discussed and scoped during the POC to align with the operator's IT and security requirements.