Hydrocarbon Processing - June 2022 - GP-15

SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES & TRANSPORT
neering assessment. The application of risk
acceptance criteria, such as those proposed
for the CSA Z662:23 standard, provides a
strategic framework for improving pipeline
safety and the use of risk assessment within
an engineering assessment.
Quantitative risk acceptance criteria are
also of interest to the U.S. regulatory bodies,
and have also been explored through
recent PHMSA industry studies and work
groups related to quantitative risk modeling
and risk tolerance thresholds. Independent
risk and reliability-based safety
cases are increasingly being requested as
an important element of engineering assessments
by U.S. regulatory bodies.
Data integration. Accurate data underlies
the successful implementation of engineering
assessments. This includes all
pipe material attributes, construction, inspection
and operating data necessary for
the engineering assessment/fitness-forservice
frameworks for all relevant threats
and conditions.
Creating data integration roadmaps for
each technical building block and aggregating
these on a pipeline system basis yields a
vision of the required data flows to support
an effective engineering assessment. This
vision includes being able to extrapolate
learnings across sampling populations and
pipeline systems, and across the industry
in data warehousing approaches. Data integration
requirements would be documented
in standard operating procedures and
fully integrated into an operator's business
management infrastructure (such as a geographic
information system, a warehouse
management system and/or data management
software). The current focus on and
requirements for materials verification and
traceable, verifiable and complete records
align with these data needs. Minimizing
the use of default values ensures that a riskprioritized
focus is not distorted.
Integrity data collected from continuously
evolving and improving ILI technologies
will increasingly act as a key
foundation for engineering assessments,
including ILI tools for metal loss, cracking,
mechanical damage and specific conditions
(i.e., hard spots, long seam flaws
and pipe movement). Therefore, it is
important that the objectives are clearly
defined, and that the correct ILI technology
is applied for assessing the applicable
threats. This includes consideration of the
detection and sizing capabilities. For exFIG.
6. Excerpt from ILI System Selection Guidance in NACE SP0102.
ample, the newer-generation electromagnetic
acoustic transducer (EMAT) ILI
technology has evolved significantly to a
point where it can play a primary role in
stress corrosion cracking assessment and
management programs for gas transmission
pipelines. The National Association
of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International
SP0102 standard,4
as referenced in
the American Petroleum Institute (API)
1163 standard,5
provides guidance on
proper tool selection by threat, as shown
by the excerpt in FIG. 6.
A documented verification and validation
assessment of the ILI tool performance
is a necessary foundation for using
the ILI data as part of the engineering assessments.
Also, qualification programs
related to non-destructive evaluation tools
used in the field for such validation also
play a key role in ensuring that the ILI results
are accurately validated.
Where ILI data serves as a foundation
for the engineering assessment, it should
not be taken for granted that all stakeholders
are familiar with, or accepting of, the
ILI technology applied (particularly for
less-established technologies). A full API
1163-based analysis, including the tool
selection against the objective, the run
verification (i.e., data quality assessment,
run functionality checks) and the tool
performance validation (i.e., unity plots
of tool vs. infield measurements) should
be included. There should also be workNOTES
This
article was
first presented at the 34th
Pipeline Pigging & Integrity Management Conference,
February 2022.
a
On October 1, 2019, the PHMSA finalized a rule
for gas transmission pipelines that had been in
development for more than 8 yr. The effective date
is designated as July 1, 2020. This highly anticipated
rule (referred to as the Gas Mega Rule) is the most
significant change to existing gas pipeline regulations
since 1970 and is likely to have a significant
impact on the operation of gas transmission assets
in the U.S. The rule is split into three parts, generally
focusing on MAOP reconfirmation, material verification
and integrity assessments outside of HCAs
(Part 1); improvements to repair and response criteria
and to the integrated master plan (IMP) (Part 2,
still anticipated); and gas gathering (Part 3, released
in November 2021).
LITERATURE CITED
Complete literature cited available online at
www.GasProcessingNews.com.
BEN MITTELSTADT is Director of Technical Services
at Dynamic Risk Assessment Systems Inc.
DAN WILLIAMS is a Principal Consultant at
Dynamic Risk Assessment Systems Inc.
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2022 15
flows and analysis steps to deal with outliers
in tool performance. There must be
pathways for investigation and root cause
analysis for outliers, and, where necessary,
opportunities to reject the inspection
where outliers or significant data degradation
gaps cannot be resolved.
Part 2. Part 2 will be published on
www.GasProcessingNews.com. GP
http://www.GasProcessingNews.com http://www.GasProcessingNews.com
Hydrocarbon Processing - June 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Hydrocarbon Processing - June 2022
