View
381
Download
2
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
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
Recommended