Challenges in the Development of a Risk Management System for Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines

Author(s):  
Mario Pezzi Filho ◽  
Jose´ Flavio A. Carvalho ◽  
Mike Gloven ◽  
Elaine Hendren ◽  
Steve Gosse

This paper covers some challenges encountered in the development of a risk management system for onshore natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines. This system is based on the premises of PID – Petrobras Pipeline Integrity Management Program that defines rules for risk calculation and risk mitigation actions to be carried out whenever risk is above a level defined as tolerable. Commercial risk assessment software was customized to PID and is being upgrade with an algorithm able to assist in optimizing risk mitigation projects based on proposed scenarios. This study presents the challenges and benefits of implementing such a risk management system on a prototype pipeline system and the difficulties faced along the development of a scenario optimization algorithm, which is still in progress at the date of its publication.

Author(s):  
Е. Усова ◽  
E. Usova ◽  
Валерий Фунтов ◽  
Valeriy Funtov ◽  
А. Бутов ◽  
...  

The article is devoted to the introduction of risk management system in the activities of JSC Achimgaz, operating in the oil and gas sector and implementing the Project for the extraction of natural gas and condensate (hereinafter the Project). The analysis of implementation, its effectiveness within a system is discussed. According to the analysis the conclusion about the necessity of creating a unified system that integrates risk management into decision-making processes, key business processes and the culture of the organization, according to GOST ISO 31000-2010.


Author(s):  
M. Robb Isaac ◽  
Saleh Al-Sulaiman ◽  
Monty R. Martin ◽  
Sandeep Sharma

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.


Author(s):  
Reena Sahney ◽  
Mike Reed ◽  
Darren Skibinsky

The Canadian Energy Pipeline Association (CEPA) is a voluntary, non-profit industry association representing major Canadian transmission pipeline companies. With the advent of changes in both CSA Z6621 as well as the National Energy Board Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR)2, the membership determined a Recommended Practice regarding a Management Systems Approach for Facilities Integrity was needed. As such, the Pipeline Integrity Working Group (PIWG) within CEPA formed a task group to support the initiative. The outlined approach was intended to have two main philosophical underpinnings: it must comprehensively support safe pipeline system operations and it must provide a practical mechanism for implementing a management systems approach for Facilities Iintegrity. The main challenge in developing a framework for a Facilities Integrity Management System lies in the broad range of equipment and system types that the management system must encompass. That is, equipment, in the context of Facilities Integrity Management, must encompass not only station equipment (such as rotating equipment, valves, meters etc.,) but also categories such as high pressure station piping and fuel lines. Further, there was the recognition that Operators already have an array of tools, processes and techniques in place to manage their various equipment and systems. In light of these observations, the Recommended Practice describes a framework that uses major equipment types as a key differentiator. This is an approach that can be easily aligned with existing corporate computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS) such as SAP™ or Maximo™. Once the equipment categorization has been established, the Recommended Practice then provides guidance regarding the specific requirements that should be addressed for each equipment category based on the framework in CSA Z662-11 Annex N. Specific suggestions are provided in the areas of: alignment with corporate goals and objectives, scope, definitions, performance metrics, risk assessments, competency of personnel, change management as well as documentation. The approach also maximizes the opportunity to leverage existing systems and processes to the extent possible. Overall the Recommended Practice should provide operators with a practical way to achieve a greater degree of rigor and alignment of facilities integrity management while ensuring detailed study and analysis is focused in the most appropriate areas.


Author(s):  
Tamara Oleshko ◽  
Nataliia Popyk ◽  
Yana Osypova

Risks are an integral part of any company. Not all types of risk can be identified, not all risk mitigation measures are cost-effective. Risk and the cost of avoiding it in aviation require rational decision-making mechanisms. There are many different risks in any airline as an aircraft operator, carrier and business entity. One of the main tasks of airlines is to minimize them. The article examines the risks that arise in the process of airlines and analyzes the risk management system in airlines. The impact of the pandemic on the aviation industry of Ukraine has been studied. The aviation industry both in Ukraine and in the world plays an important role, its importance in the world economy is constantly growing. This is facilitated by both technological development and the latest developments in the aviation industry, as well as globalization. However, at the same time, the number of risks is increasing, they are becoming more complex and diverse. Therefore, the task of risk management is relevant. Today, the risk management system of any airline is an urgent need, because the competitiveness and success of the airline is inextricably linked to risks. The activities of modern commercial enterprises, including civil aviation enterprises, are aimed at the formation of sustainable competitiveness and long-term survival. There are hundreds of airlines in the world, including 55 in Ukraine. Today, civil aviation in the world is in crisis. Ukrainian aviation is no exception. The closure of state borders and other measures taken in many countries to combat the spread of the coronavirus have led to a catastrophic reduction in air traffic. As a result, airlines were forced to reduce the frequency or cancel the vast majority of flights. All participants in the aviation market suffer from this situation. The development of a risk management system in the airline should be an integral part of its targeted management. The structure of risks faced by the airline is very complex and diverse. Risk is the residual probability of an event with significant consequences after considering mitigation measures.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-40
Author(s):  
Karen Daniela Salamanca-González ◽  
Karen Lucía Valencia-Ariza ◽  
Ever Ángel Fuentes-Rojas

Disasters are events that can generate as a result, material, economic and human losses and demands a suitable management for prevention, mitigation, reduction and control. For the development of the system of disasters risk management in Cáqueza, Cundinamarca, is presented sequentially, a geophysical diagnosis, from maps of zoning for hazards, and a social evaluation of the population, which served as a basis for the design of strategies aimed at risk mitigation and preparedness and response of the population in case of an emergency.


Author(s):  
Jeffrey Lachey ◽  
Keith Vanderlee ◽  
Robert Jewell ◽  
Tony Alfano

As risk assessment methodologies, tools, and processes continue to evolve in the industry, utilizing risk outputs to not only identify high risk locations, but to also understand the driver(s) behind the elevated risks for those locations is paramount. The ideal scenario for reducing pipeline risk is utilizing a risk-driven mitigation plan as this ensures the optimal use of company dollars, but also inherently means that a company has a firm understanding of their data and pipeline system. When the company understands their data and the implications for its inaccuracies, whether it be improper data alignment or incorrect application of data, they can effectively employ a campaign for preventative and mitigative measures (P&MM). However, if suspect data is used during a risk assessment, P&MM cannot accurately target risk drivers and high risk locations, making it challenging for the company to maximize their resources. For well over a year, an on-going partnership between AGL Resources Inc. (AGL) and Det Norske Veritas (U.S.A.), Inc. (DNV GL) has ensued to tailor a GIS-based risk management software solution for AGL. Through this collaboration among Integrity Management, Risk Management, IT, GIS, and Operations & Maintenance subject matter experts (SMEs) on both sides, one central hub of cross-functional pipeline knowledge was created. As a result, countless opportunities were exploited to identify supplementary data sources to employ new data manipulation techniques and processes, providing AGL with the foundation for such a risk-based Preventative & Mitigative Measure program. With the foundation laid and the proper risk elements present, AGL can now execute optimized risk-informed responses to identified high risk locations, pipeline segments, or pipeline systems. These optimized responses require an understanding of the types of P&MM available to reduce the threats and consequences, the costs involved for each P&MM implemented, and the utilization of a tool to allow various ‘what-if’ risk analyses to be conducted. Adopting and integrating this process as part of AGL’s risk management program allows them to capitalize on the maintenance dollars they spend while also reducing the potential hazards to the surrounding people, places and environment.


Author(s):  
Phillip Nidd ◽  
Terence Thorn ◽  
Monica K. Porter

Aiming for zero — zero leaks, zero ruptures, zero third party damage hits, zero-harm to the public may be considered by some to be unrealistic, but it is definitely a goal worth chasing. Striving for this level of perfection is key in achieving pipeline operational excellence and avoiding operational mediocrity. Central to safe operations is a pipeline integrity management plan (IMP) that establishes processes for assessing and mitigating risk within a framework structured to ensure the long-term integrity of pipeline system assets. When properly implemented in compliance with regulation and industry practice, an IMP will reduce both the likelihood and consequences of incidents. It remains the cornerstone in the management of pipeline risk and safety performance and is critical in preventing system failures, injuries, property damage, and other serious consequences. But a sustainable process for managing risk and improving performance must go beyond relying on regulatory compliance and following generic industry practices. In this respect, too often IMPs are judged only from a compliance perspective that provides little insight into how well the IMP is being executed or whether the management systems are actually effective. Integrity management can also be examined in context of the larger corporate culture and with the specific corporate processes that impact employees’ decisions and behaviors in ways that transcend procedures printed in a manual. A culture of adherence to compliance as an ultimate goal can lead to complacency, and a company cannot achieve a zero incident level adhering only to regulations. The focus on meeting regulatory requirements should be replaced by an integrated broader view on risk management derived in part from emerging industry best practices and standards. Benchmarking against these standards can establish a performance baseline, identify opportunities for improvements, set targets, measure performance, and instill a continuous improvement process. An approach to assess the degree to which an IMP is regulatory compliant, technically adequate, implemented and effective is to apply a “Plan,” “Do,” “Check,” “Act” (PDCA) based approach. This framework, while confirming basic regulatory compliance, also allows an operator to determine the degree to which the IMP is being executed in alignment with corporate management system objectives and accepted best practice guidelines relating to the 4 P’s — “People, Process, Product and Performance.” When applied as the basis for an extra stage “E” review, this PDCA process helps determine the health and risk-reducing “effectiveness” of the IMP through application of record reviews, subject matter expertise, supporting personnel interviews, industry consensus standard benchmarking and assessment of lagging and / or leading indicators as follows: • Are the workflows required to satisfy IMP objectives and the corresponding personnel accountabilities clearly defined? • Are technical procedures in place to meet IMP objectives and satisfy IMP work flow requirements? • Are the procedures adequate, up to date and readily available to integrity management personnel? • Have the procedures been effectively implemented? • Are records indicating work flow process completion available? • Is a management of change process embedded within the procedure and work flow process? • Is there a process to receive input from personnel to provide suggestions for continuous improvement? • Is the IMP as structured and implemented in alignment with corporate management system and enterprise risk management objectives? • Is the IMP effective in reducing pipeline risk and providing a sound and defensible basis for risk-based decisions and investment planning? Traditional integrity management provides focus on assessing risks and addressing those risks through mitigation activities, while ensuring compliance with laws and regulations designed to continually improve safety. The challenge today is to go beyond determining if an IMP is simply in compliance. An effective risk management system is one where there is a strong safety culture; decisions at all levels of the organization are based on an understanding and consideration of risks; there is continuous monitoring of risk levels and adjustment of responses; and continuous improvement is embedded in the procedures and processes.


Author(s):  
Bushra Waheed ◽  
Brodie Couch ◽  
Gouri Bhuyan ◽  
Hassan Iqbal ◽  
Eddie Lee

Integrity Management Program (IMP) is a systematic and documented program for assuring asset integrity throughout the full life cycle of an asset. To ensure safe and reliable operation, the British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission (Commission) has been requiring its licensed pipeline operators through its regulations to develop and implement pipeline integrity management programs (IMPs) in accordance with Canadian Industry Standard CSA Z662. The auditing process, the collated results and findings from the IMP audit years (2011–15) were published in IPC 2016-64161[1]. Since 2016, the Commission has enhanced its IMP compliance assurance process, and aligned it with the management system approach using Deming’s model of plan-do-check-act (PDCA) for IMP components and incorporated a lifecycle approach that spans the entire lifecycle of a pipeline system from planning to abandonment. In addition, the Commission has adopted a multi-criteria decision-making approach when prioritizing which operators to audit. This method utilizes weighted rank approach and takes into account multiple factors, such as, previous IMP audit results, pipeline length and product, class location, incident frequency, and asset age. Through collaborative efforts with the University of British Columbia (Okanagan), an innovative risk based audit tool — Integrity Management Program Audit and Knowledge Tool (IMPAKT) has been developed to help evaluate the compliance of operators’ IMP in terms of the management system approach and its associated risk. This tool conducts three-dimensional analysis of IMP performance using the failure mode effect analysis (FMEA) technique and allows the Commission to generate a risk profile for each IMP component to determine which components are most critical, requiring immediate attention. The final audit results are presented as a Risk Priority Number (RPN), which is a product of severity, occurrence and action. An effective integrity management program requires a strong safety culture, therefore, safety culture aspects are incorporated into the risk based auditing tool, IMPAKT. This risk based evaluation process also allows the Commission to develop a compliance benchmark to make comparison between different operators’ IMP results for continuous performance improvement. This paper presents the innovative approach developed and implemented by the Commission for the IMP compliance oversight (auditing) process and implication of such changes.


Author(s):  
Matías A. Valenzuela ◽  
Christopher Garrido ◽  
Ruben Castro ◽  
Alvaro Peña-Fritz ◽  
Paola Moraga ◽  
...  

<p>During last 5 years, the Ministry of Public Works and the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso are developing a Risk Management System applied in several road infrastructures called GRDR. This methodology is focus on the inspection on: 1. Structures in order to identify the vulnerability; 2. environmental conditions with the aim to identify the exposure and hazard. The relations between these indexes use an algorithm to apply the weight on the parameters. Currently, the deterministics inspection use a comprehensive management program provides an index of vulnerability (Performance indicators) in structures as bridges and pavements. But it is not included the hazard or exposure index. This paper delivers the first index of hazards and exposure related with seismic, flooding and fire threat applied on the Risk Management System (GRDR), with an implementation on two main Chilean structures, namely: La Pólvora Tunnel T3, a medium long span structure, located at the Region Valparaiso, in the maritime and urban area exposed in the last years an earthquakes and fire hazards, and Subway Line 3, located in Santiago, the new station in service during 2018 with a high users and hazard by earthquake and flooding.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document