Findings From 16 Years of Auditing Pipeline Integrity Management Systems

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver J. Hodgson ◽  
Dennis W. J. Keen ◽  
Malcolm Toft
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Good Control ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Holistic View ◽  
Integrity Management

A Pipeline Integrity Management System (PIMS) is a comprehensive, systematic, and integrated set of arrangements implemented by an operator to assess, mitigate, and manage pipeline risk. Over the past 16 years, Penspen have performed over 30 PIMS audits of pipeline operators internationally. This paper presents the collated findings from these audits, and examines the common areas in which operators have fallen short of best practice. The paper concludes with a series of recommendations based on the findings, which can be adopted by operators to improve their PIMS arrangements and practices. Penspen’s standardized 17 -element PIMS Model takes a holistic view of pipeline integrity. The audits, which are based on the Model, assess the adequacy and effectiveness of operators’ management systems and arrangements in keeping risks to people, the environment, and to the business to acceptable levels, given the anticipated pipeline operating conditions and taking into account the pipeline’s history and current status. Starting at the ‘top level’ of a PIMS, the audits consider the adequacy of operators’ pipeline policies, objectives, and performance metrics, and how these are subject to monitoring, review, and audit. The audits look at the organization responsible for managing the integrity of pipelines, and examine how all those with a role to play in the wider PIMS work together to this end. The numerous activities that take place during a pipeline’s lifecycle are investigated, to assess how the risk assessment results are used to determine the control and mitigation measures to be implemented during the pipeline’s design, construction, handover, commissioning, operation, inspection and maintenance, and how the operator ensures the effectiveness of these measures. The audits also study those ‘supporting’ processes and systems which play an important part in pipeline integrity management, including procurement, emergency response and recovery, incident investigation, change control, document and data management, and legal and code compliance. The collated results from the 30+ audits reveal that while operators typically have good control systems in place for the project stages of the pipeline lifecycle, controls for the operational stages have been found to be less robust. In terms of management and organization, operators can fail to recognize how many different individuals and teams have a role to play in the management of pipeline integrity. Furthermore, while operators often have good corporate systems in place for change control, emergency response, and risk assessment, such systems may not take into account pipeline-specific risks or requirements. Operators can tend to focus on pipeline safety and/or environmental-related risks, when through holistic assessment it can be shown that risks associated with production interruptions will tend to drive actions in practice.

The Development of a Facilities Integrity Management Program Recommended Practice for Canadian Energy Pipelines

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reena Sahney ◽  
Mike Reed ◽  
Darren Skibinsky
Keyword(s):  
Management System ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Main Challenge ◽  
Transmission Pipeline ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Major Equipment

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.

Risk-Based Maintenance: A New Vision for Asset Integrity Management

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randal L. Montgomery ◽  
Chris Serratella
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Reliability Analysis ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Plant Personnel ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
New Vision

This paper describes a holistic, risk-based approach to asset integrity management (AIM). The approach outlined in this paper is referred to as risk-based maintenance. This approach is based on proven risk assessment and reliability analysis methodologies, as well as the need to have appropriate management systems. Combining these tools and management systems provides a holistic approach to managing asset integrity, rather than a seemingly random application of analysis approaches and improvement initiatives. The information in this paper will benefit plant personnel interested in implementing an integrated AIM program or advancing their current AIM program to the next level.

In-Service Buckling Assessment: The Correct Use of Engineering Analysis Tools

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Bartolini ◽  
Lorenzo Marchionni ◽  
Sara Tassetti ◽  
Alberto Battistini ◽  
Luigino Vitali
Keyword(s):  
Service Condition ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Offshore Pipeline ◽  
Global Buckling ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Design Analyses

There is consensus on the need for in-service buckling analyses to assess the integrity of both flowlines and long distance trunklines subject to HP/HT service condition. The extent of the analyses and supporting survey depends on the severity of the application. In the last two decades, the pipeline industry has gained significant experience in both the design and operation of pipeline systems exposed to global buckling. Actually, the early 90s have been a watershed: before the phenomenon was just known (theoretically), then it was seen...as soon as pipeline integrity management programmes have been introduced in the offshore pipeline industry practices. Although, limited information have been documented in the open literature, now as then. Several efforts have been dedicated to develop design methods and procedures suitable for operating pipeline safely as well as protecting the population, environmental resources and assets. At the beginning, there was a gap to be closed as specific mitigation measures were never designed. Nowadays, thanks to computational progress, it seems that the attention is addressed to face the uncertainties affecting the subject matter but, sometime, leading to overdesign. The scope of the paper is to present aspects of global buckling design analyses that were performed in recent projects with the aim to highlight the challenges and the risks, the accuracy or the limitation of the methods, the feedback and the lesson learnt of real installed pipelines under operating conditions.

Case for Continuous Reassessment of Risk in Managing Pipeline Integrity

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Len ◽  
James Mihell ◽  
Keith Adams ◽  
Cameron Rout
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
Assessment Plans ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Effective Use ◽  
Integrity Assessments

The practice of employing risk assessment as a tool for developing assessment plans has been universally accepted by gas and liquid pipeline operators. Risk management is a process that is inherent in the effective implementation of a pipeline integrity management program (IMP). In an IMP risk is used to accomplish the following activities: • Identifying potential threats and consequences to a pipeline; • Prioritizing integrity assessments; • Assessing the benefits derived from mitigating actions; • Determining the effectiveness of mitigation measures for identified threats; • Assigning preventative and mitigative measures to be implemented; • Assessing integrity re-assessment intervals; and • Determining effective use of resources. This paper endeavors to discuss the benefits of conducting ongoing risk assessments in support of overall pipeline integrity management.

scholarly journals Population simulations of COVID-19 outbreaks provide tools for risk assessment and continuity planning

JAMIA Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Peng ◽  
Rowland W Pettit ◽  
Christopher I Amos
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
Robustness Analysis ◽  
Health Policies ◽  
Command Line ◽  
Public Health Policies ◽  
Continuity Planning ◽  
Quantitative Estimates ◽  
Community Infection

Abstract Objectives We developed COVID-19 Outbreak Simulator (https://ictr.github.io/covid19-outbreak-simulator/) to quantitatively estimate the effectiveness of preventative and interventive measures to prevent and battle COVID-19 outbreaks for specific populations. Materials and methods Our simulator simulates the entire course of infection and transmission of the virus among individuals in heterogeneous populations, subject to operations and influences, such as quarantine, testing, social distancing, and community infection. It provides command-line and Jupyter notebook interfaces and a plugin system for user-defined operations. Results The simulator provides quantitative estimates for COVID-19 outbreaks in a variety of scenarios and assists the development of public health policies, risk-reduction operations, and emergency response plans. Discussion Our simulator is powerful, flexible, and customizable, although successful applications require realistic estimation and robustness analysis of population-specific parameters. Conclusion Risk assessment and continuity planning for COVID-19 outbreaks are crucial for the continued operation of many organizations. Our simulator will be continuously expanded to meet this need.

scholarly journals STOCHASTIC CARBON EMISSION ESTIMATION METHOD FOR CONSTRUCTION OPERATION

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Yong YI ◽  
Han-Seong GWAK ◽  
Dong-Eun LEE
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Emission ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Estimation Method ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Analysis Tool ◽  
Micro Scale ◽  
Work Tasks ◽  
Emission Estimation ◽  
Construction Operation

Low carbon construction is an important operation management goal because greenhouse gas (GHG) reduc­tion has become a global concern. Major construction resources that contribute GHG, such as equipment and labour, are being targeted to achieve this goal. The GHG emissions produced by the resources vary with their operating conditions. It is commendable to provide a statistical GHG emission estimation method that models the transitory nature of resource states at micro-scale of construction operations. This paper proposes a computational method called Stochastic Carbon Emission Estimation (SCE2) that measures the variability of GHG emissions. It creates construction operation models consisting of atomic work tasks, utilizes hourly equipment fuel consumption and hourly labourer respiratory rates that change according to their operating conditions classified into five categories, and identifies an optimal resource combi­nation by trading off eco-economic performance metrics such as the amount of GHG emissions, operation completion time, operation completion cost, and productivity. The study is of value to researchers because SCE2 fill in a gap to eco-economic operation modelling and analysis tool which considers operating conditions at micro-scale of construction operation having many stochastic work tasks. This study is also relevance to practitioners because it allows project man­agers to achieve eco-economic goals while honouring predefined constraints associated with time and cost.

Risk assessment of waterborne protozoa: current status and future trends

Parasitology ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 117 (7) ◽  
pp. 205-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. J. GIBSON ◽  
C. N. HAAS ◽  
J. B. ROSE
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Detection Methods ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Microbial Risk Assessment ◽  
Microbial Risk ◽  
Chemical Risk Assessment ◽  
Low Levels

Throughout the past decade much research has been directed towards identifying the occurrence, epidemiology, and risks associated with waterborne protozoa. While outbreaks are continually documented, sporadic cases of disease associated with exposure to low levels of waterborne protozoa are of increasing concern. Current methodologies may not be sensitive enough to define these low levels of disease. However, risk assessment methods may be utilised to address these low level contamination events. The purpose of this article is to provide an introduction to microbial risk assessment for waterborne protozoa. Risk assessment is a useful tool for evaluating relative risks and can be used for development of policies to decrease risks. Numerous studies have been published on risk assessment methods for pathogenic protozoa including Cryptosporidium and Giardia. One common notion prevails: microbial risk assessment presents interesting complications to the traditional chemical risk assessment paradigm. Single microbial exposures (non-threshold) are capable of causing symptomatic illness unlike traditional chemical exposures, which require a threshold to be reached. Due to the lack of efficient recovery and detection methods for protozoa, we may be underestimating the occurrence, concentration and distribution of these pathogenic micro-organisms. To better utilize the tool of microbial risk assessment for risk management practices, future research should focus in the area of exposure assessment.

The Role of Offshore Monitoring in an Effective Deepwater Riser Integrity Management Program

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Goldsmith ◽  
Elizabeth Foyt ◽  
Madhu Hariharan
Keyword(s):  
Failure Modes ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Measured Data ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Positioning Systems ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Deepwater Riser

As offshore field developments move into deeper water, one of the greatest challenges is in designing riser systems capable of overcoming the added risks of more severe environments, complicated well requirements and uncertainty of operating conditions. The failure of a primary riser component could lead to unacceptable consequences, including environmental damage, lost production and possible injury or loss of human life. Identification of the risks facing riser systems and management of these risks are essential to ensure that riser systems operate without failure. Operators have recognized the importance of installing instrumentation such as global positioning systems (GPS), vessel motion measurement packages, wind and wave sensors and Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) units to monitor vessel motions and environmental conditions. Additionally, high precision monitoring equipment has been developed for capturing riser response. Measured data from these instruments allow an operator to determine when the limits of acceptable response, predicted by analysis or determined by physical limitations of the riser components, have been exceeded. Regular processing of measured data through automated routines ensures that integrity can be quickly assessed. This is particularly important following extreme events, such as a hurricane or loop current. High and medium alert levels are set for each parameter, based on design analysis and operating data. Measured data is compared with these alert levels, and when an alert level is reached, further response evaluation or inspection of the components in question is recommended. This paper will describe the role of offshore monitoring in an integrity management program and discuss the development of alert levels based on potential failure modes of the riser systems. The paper will further demonstrate how this process is key for an effective integrity management program for deepwater riser systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document