A Streamlined Approach for Pipeline Integrity Management

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd R. Porter ◽  
James E. Marr
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Baseline Risk ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Near Term

Formulating and implementing an integrity management plan (IMP) that satisfies Regulatory compliance requirements as mandated in the United States Department of Transportation (US-DOT, CFR 192 / 195) is a significant undertaking. The initial implementation step as defined in the regulations, is to identify high consequence areas (HCA’s or “covered segments”, and the integrity threats that could potentially impact the pipeline. These threats drive the data requirements, i.e. the minimal data sets required to address and evaluate these threats. This data must be gathered, aligned, integrated and technically analyzed (i.e. use of threat models) in a consistent and systematic manner. A baseline / risk assessment is then conducted using this data with the integrity threat models — to identify potentially higher risk areas within a system, individual lines, pipe segments, joints or specific points on the pipelines. The pipeline analysis normally includes time dependent, time independent and stable threats. Integrity management decisions are made based on the outcome of this initial assessment. This leads to selection of integrity assessment tools such as In Line Inspection (ILI) technologies, Direct Assessment (DA), Hydro Static testing, other methods, or combinations thereof. The outcome of the integrity assessment is used to develop an optimal, prioritized repair & mitigation program. In both regulated and non-regulated environments, there is critical need to prioritize and address immediate and near term repair situations a tactical approach. In order to effectively implement an IMP, a management system is normally required that captures the work process of the integrity team and delivers rapid, accurate, and economic decision support. Efficiencies can be realized with a well coordinated approach to data acquisition, management, and analysis. Tuboscope provides an integrated pipeline solution (TIPS) approach to streamline these processes, and an Integrity Management Vehicle LinaViewPRO™, to manage, analyze and present the results of the integrity analysis. In the quest for regulatory compliance and subsequent maintenance of the line, this paper will present an integrity process overview, implementation, results, and benefits from operating hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines integrity projects.

Plastic Pipe Failure Analysis

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie K. Maupin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Slow Crack Growth ◽  
The United States ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Pipe Failure ◽  
Plastic Pipe ◽  
Integrity Management

The Gas Technology Institute is currently addressing the risks and threats to plastic pipes through research sponsored by the United States Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. With the upcoming proposed rulemaking, the United States distribution companies will be required to implement a distribution integrity management plan. In developing an integrity management plan, it is key to understand system risks and threats and with 39.6 million plastic services and nearly 620,000 miles of plastic gas main, the threats to plastic pipe need to be addressed. The research discussed in this paper identifies the types of failures that affect plastic piping, excluding third party damage. The paper also describes the most common cause of leaks, slow crack growth, as well as root cause analysis of a pipe removed from service due to leaking. The cause of leaks for five other pipe segments is also discussed. The final topic of this paper is rapid crack propagation and small-scale steady state testing.

Pipeline Operator Perspective in Use of Hydrostatic Testing as an Integrity Management Tool

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Hilger ◽  
B. C. Mittelstadt ◽  
M. Piazza ◽  
P. H. Vieth
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Tool ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Body ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Test Program ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Pressure Testing ◽  
Industry Standards ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Integrity Management

Regulation in the United States mandating the use of pressure testing as an assessment tool for the construction and commissioning of pipelines was initiated in 1970. Prior to regulation, however, pressure testing was being applied within the pipeline industry to provide confidence in the operational integrity of pipeline systems. Additional assessment technologies and processes including high resolution in-line inspection continue to be developed and further enhanced; however pressure testing remains a valuable and acceptable tool in the management of pipeline integrity. Current applications include quality verification of original construction practices, integrity assessment of existing pipelines, and verification of material yield strength when key records may be missing or incomplete. It is recognized that extensive hydrostatic testing knowledge exists today in the form of API Recommended Practices, ASME code documents, the body of work of industry consultants, regulatory language and other resources. A key element to implementing the current industry standards is a pipeline operator perspective in practical application on selection of hydrostatic testing as an assessment tool and the subsequent technical design of a hydrostatic test program in order to achieve integrity management goals. This paper discusses hydrostatic testing in the context of selection as an integrity management tool, development of risk-balanced objectives for a hydrostatic test program, and understanding the limitations and potential detrimental effects of hydrostatic testing. This paper summarizes key considerations in guidelines published in 2016 that were developed through a Pipeline Research Council International (PRCI) project. While written to be applicable to all hydrostatic testing, this work is a key element of the multi-year PRCI Electric Resistance Welded (ERW) and Longitudinal Seam Pipe Program which began in 2011 and was formed to comprehensively study and develop strategies for management of factors that contribute to seam failures.

Self Directed Integrity Assessment of Non-Piggable Pipelines

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Khera ◽  
Rajesh Uprety ◽  
Bidyut B. Baniah
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Gas Industry ◽  
Internal Corrosion ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Regulatory Standards ◽  
The Us ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
External Corrosion

The responsibility for managing an asset safely, efficiently and to optimize productivity lies solely with the pipeline operators. To achieve these objectives, operators are implementing comprehensive pipeline integrity management programs. These programs may be driven by a country’s pipeline regulator or in many cases may be “self-directed” by the pipeline operator especially in countries where pipeline regulators do not exist. A critical aspect of an operator’s Integrity Management Plan (IMP) is to evaluate the history, limitations and the key threats for each pipeline and accordingly select the most appropriate integrity tool. The guidelines for assessing piggable lines has been well documented but until recently there was not much awareness for assessment of non-piggable pipelines. A lot of these non-piggable pipelines transverse through high consequence areas and usually minimal historic records are available for these lines. To add to the risk factor, usually these lines also lack any baseline assessment. The US regulators, that is Office of Pipeline Safety had recognized the need for establishment of codes and standards for integrity assessment of all pipelines more than a decade ago. This led to comprehensive mandatory rules, standards and codes for the US pipeline operators to follow regardless of the line being piggable or non-piggable. In India the story has been a bit different. In the past few years, our governing body for development of self-regulatory standards for the Indian oil and gas industry that is Oil Industry Safety Directorate (OISD) recognized a need for development of a standard specifically for integrity assessment of non-piggable pipelines. The standard was formalized and accepted by the Indian Ministry of Petroleum in September 2013 as OISD 233. OISD 233 standard is based on assessing the time dependent threats of External Corrosion (EC) and Internal Corrosion (IC) through applying the non-intrusive techniques of “Direct Assessment”. The four-step, iterative DA (ECDA, ICDA and SCCDA) process requires the integration of data from available line histories, multiple indirect field surveys, direct examination and the subsequent post assessment of the documented results. This paper presents the case study where the Indian pipeline operators took a self-initiative and implemented DA programs for prioritizing the integrity assessment of their most critical non-piggable pipelines even before the OISD 233 standard was established. The paper also looks into the relevance of the standard to the events and other case studies following the release of OISD 233.

The Role, Limitations, and Value of Hydrotesting vs In-Line Inspection in Pipeline Integrity Management

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Johnson ◽  
Steve Nannay
Keyword(s):  
Growth Rates ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Comprehensive Assessment ◽  
Case Histories ◽  
The Public ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Failure Pressure ◽  
High Profile ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Integrity Management

In-Line Inspection has become the first choice for integrity assessment for most pipeline operators. The data generated from modern ILI tools allows operators a comprehensive assessment of the condition of their pipelines so they can plan out integrity actions based on the condition of the line. In-line inspection vendors continue to upgrade their tools and provide new services to pipeline operators to enhance integrity management programs. The data provided by these tools is relied upon by operators, regulators, and the public to be correct and complete and in most instances it is, but when near critical features are missed or data is used improperly, the results can be catastrophic. Hydrostatic testing has fallen out of favor with many pipeline operators due to the operational headaches, costs, difficult logistics, and lack of data generated during a hydrotest to conduct future integrity work. However, in light of a number of high profile accidents on pipelines that failed after an ILI run was performed, it may be time to reassess the role that hydrostatic testing plays in modern pipeline integrity management programs. This paper will explore failures and other case histories that have occurred on lines regulated by PHMSA where ILI results alone have failed to provide all of the necessary information to maintain pipeline integrity and how hydrostatic testing may provide value to integrity management programs. Limitations and misconceptions of ILI and hydrostatic testing will be discussed, particularly for seam defects and similar types of defects. Based on these analyses and observations, the roles of hydrostatic testing and ILI tools in a successful integrity management plan will be discussed along with flaw growth rates, predicted failure pressure calculations, re-inspection intervals, and other elements of successful integrity management programs.

Total Pipeline Integrity Management System Implemented for KOC Pipelines: A Case Study

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Robb Isaac ◽  
Saleh Al-Sulaiman ◽  
Monty R. Martin ◽  
Sandeep Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Management System ◽  
Significant Loss ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Transit System ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Integrity Management

In early 2005, Kuwait Oil Company (KOC) initiated a Total Pipeline Integrity Management System (TPIMS) implementation in order to carry out a major integrity assessment of its operating facilities, equipment, buried plant piping and pipeline network and to establish a continuing integrity management program. KOC Transit System is a complex infrastructure consisting of over three hundred pipelines, thousands of wellhead flow lines, and consumer and offshore lines for which there was a significant loss of data when the facilities were destroyed during a military invasion in 1990. An initial pipeline system assessment identified issues and actions regarding condition of the pipelines, corridors, requirements on in-line inspection (ILI), documentation, RISK assessment, status of international code compliance, and overall state of the system. Following recommendations from that initial assessment led to the development of a long term strategy; the execution of which required the implementation of a comprehensive integrity management program. This case study discusses the results obtained after five years of implementation of TPIMS at KOC. It will demonstrate some of the complex components involved in managing the integrity of the Transit System that have been made possible through the implementation of the system. The general concept and structure of TPIMS will be described, and how it deals with the complexity of the KOC pipeline system. The system made it possible to integrate and manage data from various sources, by conducting integrity assessment using ILI, Direct Assessment and hydrostatic testing, as well as structure a comprehensive RISK & Decision Support mechanism. This is one of the world’s first implementations of this magnitude which encompasses such a wide range of services and variables; all being managed in a single environment and utilized by a multitude of users in different areas at KOC. The biggest challenge in a project of this scope is data management. Examples will be shown of the integration structure to illustrate the benefits of using a single comprehensive and versatile platform to manage system requirements; ultimately providing system reliability and improving overall operational efficiency.

Dent Assessment and Management: API Recommended Practice 1183

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Dinovitzer ◽  
Sanjay Tiku ◽  
Mark Piazza
Keyword(s):  
Model Development ◽  
Complex Function ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Operating Pressure ◽  
Operating Life ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Dent Depth

Abstract Pipeline dents can be developed from the pipe resting on rock, a third-party machinery strike, rock strikes during backfilling, amongst other causes. The long-term integrity of a dented pipeline segment is a complex function of a variety of parameters including pipe geometry, indenter shape, dent depth, indenter support, secondary features, and pipeline operating pressure history at and following indentation. In order to estimate the safe remaining operating life of a dented pipeline, all of these factors must be considered and guidelines for this assessment are not available. US DOT regulations (49 CFR 192 and 195) include dent repair and remediation criteria broadly based upon dent depth, dent location (top or bottom side), pressure cycling (liquid or gas), and dent interaction with secondary features (weld, corrosion, cracks). The criteria defined above are simple to use, however, they may not direct maintenance to higher risk dent features and be overly conservative or, in some cases, unconservative. PRCI, USDOT, CEPA and other full-scale testing, finite element modelling and engineering model development research has been completed to evaluate the integrity of pipeline dents. These results have demonstrated trends and limits in dent behavior and life that can improve on existing codified and traditional treatment of dents. With these research results a guideline for dent management can be developed to support operators develop and implement their pipeline integrity management programs. This paper provides an overview of the newly developed API recommended practice for assessment and management of dents (RP 1183). The RP considers dent formation strain, failure pressure and fatigue limit states including the effects of coincident features (i.e. welds, corrosion, cracks and gouges). This paper will focus on how pipeline operators can derive value from this step change in integrity management for dents. The paper describes the basis for the dent screening and integrity assessment tools included in the RP. This RP provides well founded techniques for engineering assessment that may be used to determine the significance of dent features, if remedial actions are required and when these actions should be taken.

scholarly journals Farm Bill: Helping Landowners Help Wildlife

EDIS ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 2006 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin C. Thomas ◽  
William M. Giuliano
Keyword(s):  
Land Management ◽  
The United States ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Phone Call ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Service Agency ◽  
Farm Bill ◽  
Eligibility Requirements ◽  
Resources Conservation ◽  
Farm Service Agency

The United States Department of Agriculture administers a wide variety of Farm Bill programs through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the Farm Service Agency (FSA), and the Forest Service (FS). A good place to start is a phone call to your local NRCS service representative, county extension agent, or county forester to find out which Farm Bill program best fits your land management goals. All of the programs have variable deadlines, specific eligibility requirements, and generally include the development and implementation of a land management plan. A brief summary of the available programs, followed by contact information, is listed in this document. This document is WEC 205 and one of a series of the Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, UF/IFAS Extension. First published: January 2006.

Managing the Threat of Selective Seam Weld Corrosion Using a State of the Art ILI System

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Davies ◽  
Simon Slater ◽  
Christoper De Leon
Keyword(s):  
Material Properties ◽  
Weld Zone ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Seam Weld ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Weld Corrosion

Abstract For many years, pipeline safety regulations in the US have defined prescriptive minimum requirements for integrity management combined with a clear expectation that operators should do more than the minimum where appropriate. The regulations have also provided operators with the flexibility to take a performance based integrity management approach leveraging as much information available to manage threats effectively. One the threats that must be managed is Selective Seam Weld Corrosion (SSWC). SSWC is an environmentally assisted mechanism in which there is increased degree of metal loss in the longitudinal weld in comparison to the surrounding pipe body. An appropriate definition is linear corrosion that is deeper in the longitudinal weld zone than the surrounding pipe body. In some cases, the surrounding pipe body may have limited or no corrosion present, and in other cases the pipe body corrosion may have occurred but at a slower rate than the local corrosion in the longitudinal weld zone. Conventional responses to potential or identified threats focus on in-situ investigations, often resulting in expensive and un-planned repairs for features reported by In-line Inspection (ILI) that when assessed properly demonstrate a remnant life well into the next inspection interval. When ILI identifies metal loss indications co-located with the longitudinal seam weld, the current prescribed response is often a blanket call for remediation. Such a response may not be appropriate if an ILI system is deployed to discriminate feature types and integrity assessment is exercised leveraging a sound understanding of the pipe’s material properties. This paper describes an approach that can be taken to manage the threat of SSWC. The foundation of the approach is deployment of an appropriate ILI system incorporating an effective ILI technology, an optimized evaluation process considering the specific threat morphology, material testing and a structured dig program. The evaluation process uses the ILI data and data from the field in combination material properties data and a susceptibility analysis to classify anomalies as “Likely”, “Possible” and “Unlikely” SSWC. This is aligned with the guidance in API RP 1176 “Assessment and Management of Cracking in Pipelines” for defining an appropriate response to ILI calls. Approaching the management of SSWC in this way allows operators to define a structured response for excavation activities to verify the process and remediate features as required. By using likelihood classification the risk to pipeline integrity can be reduced by acting on the most likely SSWC features as a priority, whilst collecting the data needed to make informed decisions on where to focus resources and efforts on what is a very complicated and difficult to manage threat. The output form this work, including a future plan for managing the remaining metal loss features, can be documented in a procedure and incorporated into an existing Integrity Management Plan.

scholarly journals Development and Usability Study of an Open-Access Interviewer-Administered Automated 24-h Dietary Recall Tool in Argentina: MAR24

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ismael A. Contreras-Guillén ◽  
Sara Leeson ◽  
Rocio V. Gili ◽  
Belén Carlino ◽  
Daniel Xutuc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Latin American ◽  
The United States ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Nutritional Epidemiology ◽  
Expert Assessment ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Total Dietary Fiber ◽  
Multiple Pass ◽  
Geographical Regions

Background: Latin American countries show a fast-growing rate of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and diet is a critical risk factor that must be properly assessed. Automated dietary assessment tools to collect 24-h dietary recalls (24HR) are lacking in Argentina.Objective: This study aimed to develop an open-access automated tool (MAR24) for collecting 24HR using a multiple pass method and a database containing foods and recipes commonly consumed in Argentina.Methods: MAR24 was developed based on data from 1,285 24HR provided by male and female participants aged 18 to 68 years from the six Argentinian geographical regions. The main structure and interface of the tool were designed using Visual Basic for Applications programming language in Excel Microsoft Office 365, integrating the five steps of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) for the application of 24HR in Spanish. The tool underwent alpha testing and expert assessment to address structural and usability issues. Critical feedback and face validation from researchers and experienced dietitians, and repeated testing to collect 24HR were used to adjust and improve the tool.Results: A total of 968 food items and 100 standard Argentinian recipes were added to its database. MAR24 allows the estimation of the nutrient profile of dietary intake. The analytic food composition includes energy and 50 nutrients including water, macronutrients, total dietary fiber, total sugar, 10 minerals, 19 vitamins, eight fatty acids, cholesterol, ethyl alcohol, caffeine, and theobromine. MAR24 includes a user manual and technical manual to guide users to apply changes (e.g., add foods or recipes, or change food designation according to local terms) to fit different research and clinical applications.Conclusions: MAR24 is the first tool that uses the AMPM methodology for 24HR applications in Argentina. The tool may be used in clinical practice and clinical trials for monitoring purposes, and in validation of food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) for nutritional epidemiology studies addressing dietary-associated risk factors for NCDs.

Analysis of Pressure Test Failure Performance for Vintage Pipe

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Jing Chen ◽  
Dan Williams ◽  
Keith Leewis ◽  
David Aguiar
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Line Pipe ◽  
Manufacturing Defects ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Pressure Tests ◽  
Pressure Test ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
Test Failure

Systemic manufacturing defects in select vintage pipe pose challenges when assessing the integrity of pipeline systems comprised of such pipe. The common manufacturing technology and quality control practices in place at the time of manufacturing left some vintage line pipe prone to imperfections which could remain even after passing pressure tests in the mill or after construction. The lack of complete and reliable manufacturing records for some vintage line pipe limits granularity and adds integrity assessment uncertainties. Up until 1984, the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) required operators to report incidents related to failed pressure tests for all pipelines at the time of installation. Performance with respect to the manufacturer and year of manufacture can therefore be extracted from these reported incidents. These performance records are essential when re-establishing the MAOP (or MOP) and confirming the fitness for service of older pipelines. The pressure test failure performance in the early incident records provides insight into pipeline integrity prioritization and mitigation activities for managing pipeline safety based on pipe manufacturer, production date and seam type.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document