INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT 10 YEARS EXTERNAL CORROSION DIRECT

ASSESSMENT (ECDA)

Charlie Hall

Pipeline Integrity Actions

• Incident Overview June 10, 1999 a gasoline pipeline

ruptured

– Gasoline leaked into two creeks in the City of Bellingham, Washington and ignited

– Fireball killed three persons, injured eight other persons

– Caused significant property damage

– Released approximately 1/4 million gallons of gasoline causing substantial environmental damage

• Bellingham Washington

August 19, 2000, 30-inch near Carlsbad, New Mexico.

El Paso Pipeline Incident

El Paso Pipeline Incident

El Paso Pipeline Incident

•“deterioration of a material, usually a metal, that results from a reaction with its environment”•Soil-side corrosion typically slow progressing•Corrosion rate influenced by geological formations – “corrosive zones”

Why Pipeline Integrity?

Why Pipeline Integrity?

Why Pipeline Integrity?

Congressional Intervention

Issued Integrity Management (IM) Regulations 12/15/2003

Require Industry To: Conduct an Analysis of the Risks and Adopt a

Written IM Program in High Consequence Areas (HCA’s) by 12/17/2004

Begin Baseline Assessments: 06/17/2004 Finish Baseline Assessments: 12/17/2012 Reassess Covered Pipeline Every 7 Years

Pipeline Integrity

Scope andImplementation

(901, 903, 907, 913)Remediation

(933)HCA Identification

(903, 905)Prevent/Mitigative

(935)Threat Analysis

(917)Baseline Assessment

(919, 921)

Continual Evaluation (937, 939, 941, 943)

Performance Measures(947)

Direct Assessment (923 through 921)

QA, Training, Comm. (915, 945, 949, 951)

Gas Integrity Management Program

Baseline Assessment Tool Selection Based Upon Threat Assessment Analysis

Smart Pigging Historical Information (Need Further Investigation to Find Root Cause)

Hydrostatic Testing (PHMSA Gold Standard – Disrupts Service / Introduces Water)

External Corrosion Direct Assessment (Major Challenge for Acceptance – Industry Worked Out Process ECDA)

Advantage

“can locate areas where defects could form in the future rather than only areas were defects

have already formed”

ECDA – Four Step Process

1. Pre-Assessment

2. Indirect Inspection

3. Direct Examinations

4. Post Assessments

FAILURE TO FOLLOW PROCESS JEOPARDIZES PIPELINE SAFETY

ECDA – Four Step Process

Pre-Assessment“Utilization of Operational and Historical

Records to Assess Potential External Corrosion Locations and to Determine

Feasibility of Applying ECDA”

UNDERSTANDING PIPELINE THREATS AND THE NEED TO OVERCOME THE

ACCEPTANCE THAT RECORDS REVIEW REQUIRED

ECDA – Four Step Process

Pre-AssessmentIdentify and Address Corrosion Activity

Past or Old Corrosion Damage (Finds Old Damage after CP Problem Corrected)Present Activity (Yes)Future Corrosion Risks (Identifies Problem Areas)

Continuous Improvement Process (If Applied Correctly)

ECDA – Four Step Process

Pre-AssessmentECDA Feasibility Assessment

Integrate and Analyze Data Collected

Coating Electrical Shielding (ECDA Feasibility NO)

Backfill with Rock Content and Rock Ledges (Remain Problem)

Ground Surface Hindrances, i.e. Pavements (Drilling/Traffic Control)

Adjacent Buried Metallic Structures (Stray Current Influence)

Inaccessible Areas (Difficult to Access – Casings Overcome)

Situations That Prevent Aboveground Measurements in Reasonable Time-Frame (Planning and Execution)

ECDA – Four Step Process

Pre-AssessmentData Collection

Data Elements: Pipe-related, Construction Related, Soils/environmental, Corrosion Control, OperationalHistorical Records – Better Understanding PipelineSufficient Data – Missing RecordsSubject Matter Experts - Retirements

Determine ECDA Feasibility – (Missing Data)

Establish ECDA RegionsSimilar Physical Characteristics – Role of Environment Similar Past, Present, Future Corrosion BehaviorsUtilizes Similar IIT Tools

Select Indirect Inspection Tools

ECDA – Four Step Process

Indirect InspectionCIS - Indicates CP Level

DCVG/ACVG - Indicates Exposed Metal

Soils - Indicate Environment Corrosivity

Depth - Indicate Third Party Damage Risk

PCM - Indicate Current Attenuation

ECDA – Four Step Process

Indirect Inspection“Equipment and Practices Used to Take

Measurements at Ground Surface Above or Near a Pipeline to Locate or Characterize

Corrosion Activity, Coating Holidays, or Other Anomalies”

Data Collection, Quality, Recognition, Current Interruption, Stray Current, Casings

and AC Corrosion

ECDA – Four Step Process

Indirect InspectionLocate and define severity of coating faults where corrosion may occur or be occurring Discovery Coating Condition More Severe

Conduct at least two indirect inspection tools (IIT) the entire length of the ECDA Region Casings and AC Corrosion

Align and compare results from IIT tools More Stray Current Than Expected

Identify, classify, and report results for Direct Examination step

ECDA – Four Step Process

Direct Examination

“Inspections and Measurements Made On the Pipe Surface at Excavations as Part of External Corrosion Direct Assessment

(ECDA)”

Qualified Experienced Personnel

ECDA – Four Step Process

•INSERT INTEGRATED SURVEY GRAPH

Data Integration Management Tools

Direct Examination

ECDA – Four Step Process

Direct Examination

ECDA – Four Step Process

“Analysis of Indirect Inspections and Direct Examinations to Assess Pipeline Integrity, Prioritize Repairs, Redefine Reassessment

Intervals and Assess the Overall Effectiveness of the ECDA Process”

Post Assessment

ECDA – Four Step Process

Process Validation

Remaining Life Calculation

Define Reassessment Interval

Define Effectiveness Measures

Continuous Improvement

Reassess ECDA Feasibility

Direct Examination

ECDA – Four Step Process

INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT10 YEARS ECDA

Charlie Hall