Pre-Assessment is Key to Success for Direct Assessment in Integrity Management Programs

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Valdes ◽  
Richard McNealy
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Method ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Gas Pipeline ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Practical Consideration ◽  
Direct Examination ◽  
Effective Utilization ◽  
Direct Assessment ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Pipeline Safety

Direct Assessment is allowed under the new Gas Pipeline Integrity Management Rules published by the Office of Pipeline Safety as an assessment method subject to specific applicability restrictions, direct examination criteria and restrictions to re-inspection intervals. The final developed costs for implementing direct assessment is largely dependent upon the extent of direct examination that in turn is a function of the pipeline condition and actual threats discovered and validated. Effective utilization of Direct Assessment within an Integrity Management Program is dependent upon the recognition of the value inherent in the Pre-Assessment Stage of the Direct Assessment Process as defined by the Rule, in which, threats are predicted, applicability confirmed and as a result of data and risk analysis, it is possible to estimate the condition of the pipeline to determine if the use of Direct Assessment is a practical consideration as well as permitted under the Gas Pipeline Integrity Management Rule.

Pipeline Corrosion Integrity Management by Direct Assessment

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shailesh Javia
Keyword(s):  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Direct Assessment ◽  
Pipeline Segment ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Post Assessment ◽  
Pipeline Corrosion

Integrity management of pipelines is a systematic, comprehensive and integrated approach to proactively counter the threats to pipeline integrity. Pressure testing, in-line inspection and direct assessment methods are used to verify the integrity of a buried pipeline. The Paper Discuses Direct Assessment Methodologies for Hydrocarbon Non Piggable Pipelines. Advantages and Disadvantages of Direct Assessment methodology and DA Protocols. The DA process accomplishes this by utilizing and integrating condition monitoring, effective mitigation, meticulous documentation and timely structured reporting processes. DA is a structured, iterative integrity assessment process through which an operator may be able to assess and evaluate the integrity of a pipeline segment. TIME DEPENDENT THREATS INEVITABLY LED TO NUMEROUS FAILURES WITH A COMMON DEFINING MECHANISM OR SOURCE – CORROSION. This Paper will focus on internal, external and stress corrosion cracking direct assessment along with pre and post assessment, quality assurance, data analysis and integration, and remediation and mitigation activities. This paper will discuss some of the regulatory requirements for Pipeline Integrity Management System.

Management System Audits: A Path Towards Safer Pipelines

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Ator ◽  
Minh Ho
Keyword(s):  
Management System ◽  
System Approach ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Pipeline Systems ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
Audit Program

The National Energy Board of Canada (NEB), a federal energy regulator, has implemented a management system audit program as a tool to verify compliance with its predominantly goal-oriented Onshore Pipeline Regulations, 1999 (OPR) [1]. The OPR allow individual companies to choose the most effective way to manage their pipeline systems. The audit program is based on expected elements that the NEB believes are necessary to meet the goals of the OPR. This paper will explain why these audits and expected elements are necessary and describe how goal-oriented regulations will enhance pipeline safety. The audits conducted to date have identified several challenges that the NEB and pipeline companies face in pursuit of the goal of safe pipelines; these will be described and possible solutions will be proposed. The overall objective of the paper is to explain the benefits of using a management system approach to direct a company’s pipeline integrity management program and what is required of companies to meet the expectations of the NEB.

A New Probabilistic Methodology for Undertaking External Corrosion Direct Assessment

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Francis ◽  
Marcus McCallum ◽  
Menno T. Van Os ◽  
Piet van Mastrigt
Keyword(s):  
Surface Characteristics ◽  
Survey Techniques ◽  
Direct Assessment ◽  
Ground Survey ◽  
Pressure Test ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Corrosion Defects ◽  
Low Probability ◽  
External Corrosion ◽  
Pipeline Safety

External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA) has now become acknowledged, by the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) in North America, as a viable alternative to both in-line inspection (ILI) and the hydrostatic pressure test for the purpose of managing the integrity of high pressure pipelines. Accordingly an ECDA standard is now in existence. The essence of ECDA is to use indirect above ground survey techniques to locate the presence of coating and corrosion defects and then to investigate some of the indications directly by making excavations. However, one of the problems of above ground survey techniques is that they do not locate all defects and are susceptible to false indication. This means that the defects will not be present at all indications and that some defects will be missed. In view of the limitations of above ground survey techniques the ECDA standard requires that at least two complimentary survey techniques should be used. The selected survey techniques will depend on the nature of a particular ‘ECDA segment’, taking account of the surface characteristics. However, in many situations the surveys will include a coating survey and a corrosion survey. In general the outcome from these two surveys will be NH locations at which just the coating survey gives an indication, NC locations at which just the corrosion survey gives an indication and NHC locations at which both surveys give an indication. This paper presents a new probabilistic methodology for estimating the distributions of the actual numbers of coating and corrosion defects, taking account of the outcomes of the surveys and the probabilities of detection and false indication of both techniques. The method also shows how the probabilities of detection and false indication are updated depending on what is found during the excavations and the distributions of the numbers of remaining corrosion and coating defects are subsequently modified. Based on a prescribed repair criterion the analysis is used to determine the probability that at least one remaining corrosion defect will exceed the repair criteria. As excavations are sequentially performed the probability naturally reduces. The attainment of an acceptably low probability is used as a trigger to terminate the excavation programme. A detailed description of the development of the method is given in this paper and the application is illustrated through a simple numerical example. A description of how the method is used to build a Direct Assessment module for a pipeline integrity management system is described in an accompanying paper.

Improving and Expanding Guided Wave Ultrasonics as an Assessment Option

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Smith ◽  
Zach Barrett
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Hazardous Materials ◽  
Guided Wave ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Direct Assessment ◽  
Development Technology ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
External Corrosion ◽  
Pipeline Safety

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), the pipeline industry and standards developing organizations (SDOs) are collaborating to improve the effectiveness and expand the application of Guided Wave Ultrasonics (GWUT). This paper will illustrate how these initiatives through integrity management (IM) regulation, collaborative research and development, technology demonstrations and consultation with subject matter experts (SME) are driving these improvements. These efforts are integrating GWUT technology with External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA) and Pipeline Safety IM protocols and supporting higher confidence inspection of cased crossings. Previous to these initiatives only In-Line Inspection, Pressure Testing and Direct Assessment provided assessment options for the pipeline industry.

Are Integrity Management Programs Making a Difference?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joe Paviglianiti ◽  
Alan Murray ◽  
Tijani (TJ) Elabor
Keyword(s):  
Stress Corrosion ◽  
Failure Mechanism ◽  
Stress Corrosion Cracking ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Future Improvement ◽  
Making A Difference ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
Incident Rates

As a result of numerous stress corrosion cracking incidents in the 1980s and early 1990 the National Energy Board (NEB) held an Inquiry1 in 1995 on the SCC failure mechanism and how to prevent failures. One of the recommendations of the Inquiry was Companies were to develop a SCC management program to proactively identify and mitigate SCC. Based on the apparent success of the SCC programs in significantly reducing SCC failures, the NEB revised its Onshore Pipeline Regulations in 1999 (OPR-99)2 to require companies to develop an integrity management program (IMP) for all hazards. This paper discusses the evolution of integrity management program (IMP) requirements and evaluates incident rates and other performance metrics to determine if there is evidence that IMPs have contributed to the improvement of safety of pipelines. The paper highlights the challenges associated with gathering incident and IMP performance metrics and evaluating the data to determine if there is a correlation between the implementation of IMP and pipeline safety. In addition, the analysis discusses the challenges associated with comparing data between different countries and regulatory jurisdictions. Suggestions for future improvement are identified.

IMPAKT: Oil and Gas Pipeline Integrity Management Program Assessment

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 06018003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hassan Iqbal ◽  
Bushra Waheed ◽  
Solomon Tesfamariam ◽  
Rehan Sadiq
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Program Assessment ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Gas Pipeline ◽  
Integrity Management

IMP 2.0: The Evolution of PHMSA’s Approach for Improving Pipeline Integrity

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Wiese ◽  
Linda Daugherty
Keyword(s):  
Management Program ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Hazardous Material ◽  
The Future ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Future Direction ◽  
Pipeline Safety

This paper discusses the original motivations and objectives of the Integrity Management Program (IMP), the lessons learned from the first decade of implementing IMP, the drivers for improving and expanding IMP (“IMP 2.0”), actions that the Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) is already taking under the IMP 2.0 umbrella, as well as the future direction the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) expects IMP 2.0 to take in the next few years.

The Benefits of Consensus Standards: A Pipeline Case Study

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry Boss ◽  
Andy Drake ◽  
Keith Leewis ◽  
Bernie Selig ◽  
John Zurcher
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Gas Pipeline ◽  
The Public ◽  
Safety Improvement ◽  
Final Rule ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Standards And Regulations ◽  
Pipeline Safety

The pipeline industry has implemented a process for acquiring data and information necessary to support technically-based standards and regulations through techical studies and research and development (R&D). This process enabled the development of ASME B31.8S based on the technical facts gathered, drawing upon all stakeholders including Federal and State regulators, pipeline operators, manufacturers and suppliers and members of the public. This paper describes the process being used by the gas pipeline industry to develop standards such as B31.8S and provides examples of the benefits derived from standards. It examines in detail the benefits that the pipeline industry and regulators derived from the timely development of ASME B31.8S - Integrity Management of Gas Pipelines and the process used to support the standards’ development. The Office of Pipeline Safety developed a cost/benefit analysis to support the final rule on Integrity Management in High Consequence Areas. The OPS analysis indicates that the net cost for the gas pipeline industry to implement this program is now $4.7 B over the next 20 years as compared with the proposed rule based on the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 which they estimated to cost $10.9B over the same period. OPS has incorporated B31.8S into its regulations, which has significantly simplified them, yet through prescriptive requirements, has provided an equal or better level of safety as envisioned by Congress. While the timely development played a major role in the distillation of the regulations, B31.8S cannot take credit for the full $6.2B savings to the industry. The estimated savings provided by B31.8S to the industry will be described. Industry management and the regulators are encouraged to fully support the continuing development of standards for the pipeline industry utilizing the model developed by the gas pipeline industry.

A Prudent Approach to Evaluate Dig Effectiveness

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Schartner ◽  
Aaron Woo ◽  
Dushyant Puri ◽  
Shahani Kariyawasam
Keyword(s):  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Program Effectiveness ◽  
Field Measurements ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Direct Examination ◽  
Probabilistic Evaluation ◽  
Safety And Reliability ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
External Corrosion ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Pipeline operators analyze in-line inspection (ILI) reported features to determine if excavation is required to investigate a feature through direct examination in the ditch. Pipeline excavations require considerable resources and planning. In addition, excavations may cause disturbance to the land owner or cause varying impacts to the operation of the pipeline. Therefore, it is important to ensure that the excavation decisions are made effectively. While operators do review the key performance indicators on how the integrity programs are performing, currently there is no established definition or measure in the pipeline industry to evaluate the effectiveness of a dig program. Defining and measuring dig effectiveness would allow pipeline operators to identify areas to focus on, such as further research and development, opportunities for improvement, and potential optimization of the ILI-based corrosion management program, while maintaining safety and reliability. This paper presents a method developed by TC Energy to measure dig effectiveness to evaluate the ILI-based corrosion management program. Effectiveness of digs depends on many aspects of the corrosion management program. First, a definition of dig effectiveness that reflects the objectives of the ILI program needs to be established. The method was developed using inhouse historical dig data for external corrosion features that required mitigation based on analysis of ILI data. The focus of the study included the probabilistic evaluation of excavations to baseline what can be expected in a dig program and have a process to evaluate factors that may affect dig effectiveness. The field measurements of digs completed for corrosion driven leak and rupture threats were gathered and analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of different dig populations and to determine what bounds should be placed to monitor dig effectiveness. The advantages of measuring dig effectiveness using field results as opposed to other metrics such as repair ratio was also demonstrated in this paper. Examples of understanding areas of improvement by using the dig effectiveness are discussed. Pipeline operators have the potential to incorporate the methodology presented in this paper in the integrity management program to enhance safety and identify areas of focus with the goal of increasing the effectiveness of the corrosion management program.

Direct Assessment of Course Outcomes: Strategies and Implementations for Mechanical Engineering Courses

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Zhou ◽  
P. Corder ◽  
K. Aung
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Assessment ◽  
Mechanical Engineering ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Performance Criteria ◽  
Program Outcomes ◽  
Engineering Programs ◽  
Direct Assessment ◽  
Course Grades ◽  
Course Outcomes

The process of outcome assessment has become a major tool for evaluation of mechanical engineering programs as required by ABET. There are many ways to conduct assessment of course and program outcomes, but the direct assessment method is preferable to all other methods such as course grades and student surveys. Outcome assessment process of courses involves many steps: identifying the performance criteria, collecting the appropriate data, processing the data based on performance criteria, interpreting the results, and deciding the remediation or corrective actions to take. In this paper, strategies and implementations of direct assessment of course outcomes in the Department of Mechanical Engineering are described and discussed. Application and results of these direct assessments relevant to the Senior Capstone Design course in the Mechanical Engineering curricula are presented as an example. The methodology and implementation discussed in this paper may be beneficial to similar curricula at other institutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document