VOLUME 022012

WWW.STRUCTINT.COM

8 7 7 - 4 S I - P O W E R

Verifying MAOP pg. 5

PerfOrMing Direct AssessMent pg. 3

A new Standardfor Guided Wave Inspection pg.6

2 CONTENTS

CONTENTS VOLUME NUMBER 02

8 7 7 - 4 S I - P O W E R

Structural Integrity Pipeline Newsletter - 2011 WinterWith the House and Senate closing in on an agreement for the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty and Job Creation Act of 2011, the passing of new regulation posing new challenges for the Pipeline industry could be imminent. This new regulation may include elements addressing:

■ Increased civil penalties ■ New requirements around the installation of automatically controlled shutoff valves ■ Verification of Maximum Allowable Operating Pressures (MAOP) ensuring that records are verifiable, traceable and complete ■ Maps of High Consequence Areas (HCAs) added to the National Pipeline Mapping System ■ Studies to be conducted to determine if Integrity Management assessments should be expanded beyond HCAs

With the potential passing of this new regulation combined with the looming deadlines of the 2002 Pipeline Safety Improvement Act fast approaching, 2012 is shaping up to be a very hectic year for pipeline operators. Anticipating some of the challenges operators are expecting to face, Structural Integrity has refined specific programs around:

3 Performing Direct Assessment- on Fabricated Gate and Compressor Station ■By: Scott RiccaRdella and Ray gaRdneR

■ Assessment of compressor, metering and other fabricated gate station piping which often get overlooked in terms of HCA identification and assessment requirements. This piping is typically very challenging to assess using traditional methods, and SI has developed a specific approach to help overcome these challenges: Read more about this specific program

5 Verifying MAOP- A Programmatic Approach ■By: Scott RiccaRdella and eRic KiRKpatRicK

■ A robust MAOP Verification Program Plan to provide a detailed approach to identify key records and data elements to be collected, define a system for converting records to electronic format, extract the correct data elements into a structured database, assign conservative defaults when appropriate, perform calculations of the MAOP and implement an automated system for the grading and identification of conflicting reports. The plan, when fully implemented, can help operators execute an effective and efficient MAOP review.

6 (Back Cover) A new Standard for Guided Wave Inspection ■By JaSon Van VelSoR

■ Read about recent advancements in SI’s Guided Wave Testing program keeping SI on the forefront of NDE advanced assessment technologies. Read more about SI GWT Advancements

MAOPAssessment

Engine

PERfORMiNg DiRECT ASSESSMENT

on Fabricated Gate and Compressor Station

By: Scott RiccaRdella■ sriccardella@structint.com

Ray gaRdneR■ rgardner@structint.com

Per the Pipeline Safety Act of 2002 and subsequent Integrity Management rules, regulation mandates that gas transmission pipelines have baseline assessments of all High Consequence Areas completed by December 17, 2012, using one of the following assessment methodologies:

1. Inline inspection tool (ILI tools) or tools capable of detecting corrosion, and any other threats to which the covered segment is susceptible, 2. Pressure tests conducted in accordance with subpart J of CFR 192,3. Direct assessment to address each corrosion threat through its respective program: External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA),

Internal Corrosion Direct Assessment (ICDA), and Stress Corrosion Cracking Direct Assessment (SCCDA), 4. Other technology that an operator demonstrates can provide an equivalent understanding of the condition of the line pipe.

PHMSA response to FAQ #84 clarifies that integrity assessment provisions of the rule apply to all line pipe, including pipe that may be in the boundaries of a facility (compressor stations, metering stations, etc.). These stations can prove very difficult to assess using the traditional accepted assessment methodologies as the segments can consist of several short runs with tight bends and various tie-in and connection points limiting the ability to inspect using ILI tools or pressure testing.

Figure 1. 3-Dimensional GIS Illustration

Above Grade Piping for Direct Examination

Buried Piping for Direct Examinations

To help address these challenges, Structural Integrity designed and implemented an advanced Direct Assessment program incorporating unique tools to enable assessment of these difficult to assess segments. Pre-assessmentPre-assessment involves collecting information regarding the design factors, construction, operation, and other historical

The data collection and analysis process for facilities is typically much more challenging, as stations can have multiple pipelines varying in design

In addition, these facilities can pose some significant challenges to the use of Direct Assessment, a programmatic approach based on engineering fundamentals to assess pipeline integrity consisting of the following four-steps:

■ Pre-Assessment ■ Indirect Inspection ■ Direct Examination ■ Post Assessment

characteristics, operating parameters, and varying degrees of corrosion susceptibility throughout the facility. Drawings may not be accurate and data, if documented, is likely to be spread across multiple and disparate sources. Additionally, traditional indirect inspection tools may have limited effectiveness and excavations can be complicated by unusual depth and multiple pipelines in the dig region.

PERfORMiNg DiRECT ASSESSMENT ON fABRiCATED gATE AND COMPRESSOR STATiON 3WWW.STRUCTINT.COM

pipeline and facility records to determine the feasibility of direct assessment and establish segmented regions for assessment.

As part of the pre-assessment step for facilities, a site walk-down is performed to validate drawings and collect missing data elements. Data and drawings are then digitized and consolidated into a Geodatabase and incorporated into GIS and 3-Dimensional CAD drawings for a complete relational mapping and orientation of the piping and attributes throughout the facility. An example of the drawings is shown in Figure 3. Using these modeling tools, we can better organize, analyze, and manage the pipeline data and facilitate the completion of pre-assessment forms as well as identify the proper indirect inspection tools. In addition to assisting in the analysis, the database output also results in more organized and auditable data records.

Figure 3. Illustration of GWT Screening in a Bell-hole

Direct or DetaileD examinationDirect or detailed examination consists of excavating and examining the pipeline at the areas identified and prioritized during indirect inspection. We employ teams of inspectors experienced in a large range of advanced indirect inspection and NDE methods. Our inspectors are certified in accordance with ASNT protocol and capable of performing a variety of NDE inspection techniques, including Bell-hole examinations in accordance with NACE protocols (SP0502 and SP0206). In addition, we can supplement these inspections with more advanced tools such as Guided Wave Testing (GWT) to rapidly screen the excavation (shown in the illustration below) and provide additional screening outside of the excavation to locate and target areas for additional evaluation.

Post assessmentThe post-assessment step consists of analyzing the results from the previous step to determine whether repairs are required, determining the effectiveness of the approach, and identifying future mitigation and remediation actions, as well as a re-assessment interval. With all data from previous steps stored in an electronic format and GeoDatabase, data and results of the assessment can be easily viewed, validated, and documented. In addition, because all assessment data is stored in an easily accessible, electronic format, future assessments should prove more efficient and less costly to implement.

GWUT

Dig Site

Examine most Significant Location

with UT

Pipeline

Weld

Guided Wave Transducers

Metal Loss

Flange

Metal Loss

Figure 2: APEC Reference Electrodes Schematic

Reference Electrodes

inDirect insPectionThe indirect inspection step consists of collecting and analyzing field data to supplement the pre-assessment data and prioritize areas likely to exhibit corrosion. Using the Geodatabase and 3D drawings created in pre-assessment, selection of appropriate tools and survey techniques can be more easily identified. In some cases, traditional ECDA indirect inspection tools such as Close Interval Survey (CIS), Direct Current Voltage Gradient (DCVG), and Alternating Current Voltage Gradient (ACVG) may be suitable. These techniques collect data associated with cathodic protection levels and coating conditions, the two main elements of external corrosion

control. In other areas, where a congested area of piping exists, such as those found at most facilities and generating plants, additional structures may influence the potential measurements of the structure intended to be assessed. Low potential indications may be a factor of adjacent structures, not a lack of coating or cathodic protection.

To improve the interpretation of indirect inspection measurements, Structural Integrity uses the APEC indirect survey technique as an additional and complementary survey technique. APEC is a combined CP survey technique that collects area potential (AP) measurements based on a modified CIS approach, in combination with an evaluation of the earth current (EC) movement using an enhanced three-half cell DCVG methodology as shown in Figure 2. In a facility, it is important to know where any corrosion cell is operating and where CP currents are flowing. When CP system rectifiers are cycled “ON” and “OFF”, the migration of CP current around the facility can be understood and used to adjust and balance the overall performance of a CP system.

Determining ICDA excavation locations can also be a difficult process as the piping is likely to be routed throughout the facility and have several inclination changes and changes in dimension. Using 3D GIS and CAD-based models, flow variation among different segments can be bracketed and an analysis can be performed so that excavation selection can be targeted to areas most likely to accumulate liquid.

4 PERfORMiNg DiRECT ASSESSMENT ON fABRiCATED gATE AND COMPRESSOR STATiON 8 7 7 - 4 S I - P O W E R

By: Scott RiccaRdella■ sriccardella@structint.com

eRic KiRKpatRicK■ ekirkpatrick@structint.com

VERifyiNg MAOP

- A Programmatic Approach

meet the challenges of maoP Verification for existing natural gas PiPelines

For many operators, ensuring that records for establishing MAOP are traceable, verifiable and complete will be a significant project that requires careful planning. In preparing for such an effort, operators will wish to consider the following aspects:

■ Identification of a project team with the required skills, experience and knowledge in the code requirements for MAOP determination and whether it is necessary to seek the support of contractors/consultants to minimize the impact on daily operational requirements,

■ A clear definition of what the operator considers to be traceable, verifiable and complete, ■ A schedule and a budget; and whether rate recovery will be sought, ■ An inventory of all applicable records and their location, ■ A prioritization scheme for operators with extensive transmission mileage, ■ Selection of databases, software and/or GIS applications required to tie physical records to pipeline segments,

■ Identification of critical source documents to be scanned, ■ Conservative assumptions that may be taken if records supporting a data element cannot be found, and how such determinations are documented,

■ Process or actions to be taken if the MAOP cannot be verified with existing records.

Structural Integrity Associates (SI) has been supporting natural gas transmission pipeline operators with integrity management issues since 2002 and has experience assisting operators comply with the MAOP guidance established in PHMSA Advisory Bulletin ADB-11-01.

In September of 2010, a 30-inch natural gas transmission pipeline ruptured in San Bruno, California. The rupture occurred in a residential area, killing eight people, injuring many more, and causing substantial property damage. Subsequently, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) inform the pipeline industry of the circumstances leading up to the San Bruno incident to ensure that operators verify the records used to establish or adjust maximum allowable operating pressures (MAOP). On January 10, 2011, PHMSA issued an advisory bulletin (ADB-11-01) to natural gas pipeline operators in which it advised operators to take appropriate actions to ensure its records for transmission pipeline MAOPs are “traceable, verifiable and complete” and that operators relying on the review of design, construction, inspection, testing and other related data to calculate MAOP must diligently search, review and scrutinize documents and records and assure that the records are reliable.

Scanned Images(image of

source record for each key data element)

Access to images

As-Built, B.O.M. &Pressure Test Records

Alignment Sheets

Pipe Mill ReportsPurchase Reqs

O&M Records

IMP DirectExamRecords (dia., wt., etc.)

Legacy Practices

GIS PODSSCADA

MAOPVerification

Calculated vs. Current

ExceptionReport

Incorrect MAOPMissing Data

Contradictory Records

MitigationTracking

MAOPAssessment

Engine

MAOP KeyRecord ElementData

VERifiyiNg MOAP 5WWW.STRUCTINT.COM

A two-pronged strategic move is already helping Structural Integrity set a new standard for guided wave inspection in the energy industry.

In August, Structural Integrity acquired the Inspection Services Group from FBS, Inc. of State College, Pennsylvania, a recognized leader in guided wave technology. The acquisition will bring us a new level of expertise in ultrasonic guided wave technology, which is extensively utilized in the energy industry to inspect insulated, buried, or otherwise inaccessible piping. Structural Integrity created a new Guided Wave Technology Group dedicated exclusively to this relatively young and rapidly-evolving technology.

In parallel with the acquisition, we formed a strategic alliance with FBS to develop new guided wave inspection technologies for piping and other critical plant components. Structural Integrity will also open a Guided Wave Technology Center in State College to function as an epicenter for the development and implementation of advanced guided wave applications.

The strategic alliance has also expanded our offering with the addition of the PowerFocus™ guided wave pipe inspection system. The lightweight tool is a heavyweight when it comes to tackling tough inspection conditions and is built on a universal platform, making it available for use for other guided wave applications now under development. Structural Integrity is the first company to offer the PowerFocus™ technology as an inspection solution.

Pipes in tight locations that were previously inaccessible can now be inspected, thanks to the compact size of the PowerFocus system. This will help our clients avoid costly alternatives such as excavation or in-line inspection. This new technology also brings improved accuracy to inspection challenges such as buried or heavily coated piping. Improved focusing capabilities can direct concentrated wave energy to specific axial and circumferential locations or can be used to generate a visual representation of the inspected region, effectively pinpointing areas of the pipe for further evaluation.

Ultimately, this new relationship, new technology and new tools will allow Structural Integrity to provide best-in-class assessment capabilities and, most importantly, will bring our clients greater insight into the fitness of their plant components and systems.

A NEw STANDARDfOR gUiDED wAVE

iNSPECTiON

By: JaSon Van VelSoR■ jvanvelsor@structint.com

For more information on these events and Structural Integrity, go to:

www.structint.com/pipeline

1 16 001

8 7 7 - 4 S I - P O W E R 8 7 7 - 4 7 4 - 7 6 9 3