Pipeline%20Integrity%20Management%20in%20High%20Consequence%20Areas%20for%20Hazardous%20Liquid%20Operators

1
Pipeline Integrity Management inHigh Consequence
Areas for Hazardous Liquid Operators

• Overview of Key Rule Features

Workshop on the Integrity Management Rule for
Large Liquid Pipelines Skip Brown August 7, 2001
2
Integrity Management Rule Objectives

• Accelerate Assessments of Lines in High
  Consequence Areas (HCAs)
• Improve Company Integrity Management Systems

• Improve Government Role in Reviewing Integrity
  Plans and Programs
• Increase Public Assurance in Pipeline Safety

3
To Whom Does this Rule Apply?

• Hazardous Liquid Operators who Own or Operate 500
  or More Miles of Pipeline
• Facilities that are Jurisdictional to Part 195

4
What are HCAs for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines?

• Unusually Sensitive Areas of Environment (see
  Part 195.6)
• High Population Areas and Other Populated Areas
• Commercially Navigable Waterways

5
What must an Integrity Management(IM) Program
include?

• Identification of Segments that Could Affect HCAs
  (12/31/01)
• Baseline Assessment Plan (3/31/02)
• Framework for Implementing IM Program Elements
  (3/31/02)

6
What IM Program Elements areRequired by the
Rule?

• Identifying Segments that Could Impact HCAs
• Conducting Periodic Integrity Assessments
• Reviewing Assessment Results by Qualified
  Personnel
• Making Mitigation and Repair Decisions

7
What IM Program Elements AreRequired by the Rule?

• Integrating and Analyzing Risk Information
• Identifying and Evaluating Additional Risk
  Controls
• Measuring Program
• Performance

8
What Should be in an IM Framework?

• Address All IM Program Elements Defined in Rule
• Describe Current Processes
• Lay Out Plan for IM Program Element Improvements

9
Segment Identification

• Obtain HCA Maps
• Determine Segment Boundaries
  where Spill Could Affect HCA
• Consider Local Factors such as Topography
• Consider System Design and Operation
  Characteristics
• Utilize Field Knowledge of Local Conditions
• Document Analysis and Key Assumptions

10
What Should be in the Baseline Assessment Plan?
For each segment

• Assessment Method(s)
• In-line Inspection Tool(s)
• Corrosion
• Deformation
• Pressure Testing
• Other Technology OPS Notification Required
• Assessment Provisions Apply Only to Line Pipe

11
What Should be in the Baseline Assessment Plan?
For each segment

• Schedule identifying when segments will be
  assessed
• Basis for assessment method and schedule
• Assessments after 1/1/96
• can be used for baseline
• 50 of mileage
  completed by 9/30/04
• All segments by 3/31/08
• Highest risk segments
  assessed first

12
Keeping the Baseline Assessment Plan Up-to-Date

• Reflect Insights from
• Integrity Assessments
• Risk Analysis
• Operating Experience
• Apply New Technology
• Address Newly Identified HCAs
• Document and Retain the Basis for Plan Changes

13
Prioritizing Segments for Assessment Scheduling

• Use Existing Assessment Results
• Consider Segment-specific Risk Factors that
  Affect Likelihood and Consequences
• Documentation
• Approach and Key Assumptions
• Segment-specific Integrity Threats
• Relative Rankings of Segments

14
Implementing the Assessment Plan

• Perform Assessments
• Integrate Results with Other Information
• Prepare Excavation and Repair Schedule
• Take Appropriate Mitigation Measures

15
Implementing the Assessment Plan

• Integrate Information into Future Risk Analysis
• Determine Timing and Method for Next Assessment
• Interval ? 5 Years
• Update Assessment Plan

16
Integrating Data

• Integrity Assessment Results Evaluation
• Common reference system
• Comparisons and analysis
• Risk Assessment
• Includes integrity assessment results
• Comprehensive
• Investigative

17
Evaluate Need forAdditional Protection

• Update Risk Analysis
• Identify Additional Risk Control Opportunities
• Controls Aimed at Segments Highest Risks
• Leak Detection System Enhancements
• Emergency Flow Restricting Devices
• Evaluate Risk Reduction
• Document Bases for Management Decisions

18
Evaluating Program Performance

• Critical Self-examination
• Integrity Assessment Tools and Practices
• Management Systems
• Root Cause Analysis of Near Misses and Failures
• Performance Measures
• Feedback and Continuous Improvement

19
Rule Requires Operators to Notify OPS if They

• Use a Technology other than Pigging or Pressure
  Testing
• Are Unable to Meet Repair Schedule Requirements,
  and Cannot Reduce Pressure
• Establish an Assessment Interval Greater than 5
  Years

20
Integrity Management Program Documentation

• Baseline Assessment Plan and Revisions
• IM Framework
• Documentation of Processes for Each Program
  Element
• IM Program Performance Evaluation Findings and
  Performance Measures

21
Integrity Management Program Documentation

• Integrity Assessment Results
• Excavation and Repair Schedules
• Repair and Mitigation Records
• Records of Additional Preventive and Mitigative
  Actions Taken to Protect HCAs

22
Integrity Management Program Documentation

• Risk Assessment Results
• Evaluation of
• Leak Detection System Capability
• Need for Emergency Flow Restricting Devices
• Justification for
• Use of Other Assessment Methods
• Extending Assessment Interval beyond 5 Years
• Inability to Meet Repair Schedule Requirements

23
Summary Comments

• Assessment Requirements will Improve
  Understanding of Pipe Condition in HCAs
• Improvement in IM Systems is Key to Compliance
  with New Rule
• Information Integration and Risk Analysis are
  Critical Program Elements
• Improved Performance Results from a Commitment to
  Continuous Improvement