young call girls in Rajiv Chowk🔝 9953056974 🔝 Delhi escort Service
PHMSA Final Rule (part 1) for Gas Transmission Pipelines
1. PHMSA Final Rule for Gas Transmission Pipelines
August 2021
PIPELINE INTEGRITY
WEBINAR SERIES:
2. TODAY’S SPEAKER
Bryan Louque has over 25 years of
experience in the pipeline industry. He
has been involved with the design,
construction, and O&M of pipeline
systems with an emphasis on corrosion
control, pipeline integrity and
regulatory compliance programs on
hazardous liquids (Part 195) and
natural gas (Part 192) pipeline systems.
Bryan Louque, P.E.
Vice President of Asset Integrity and Corrosion
Audubon Companies
3. Agenda
When is the Gas Transmission Rule Effective?
What’s in the Gas Transmission Rule?
What’s not in the Gas Transmission Rule?
What’s Next?
Q&A
WHY AM I HERE?
September 2010 October 2019
4. WHEN IS THE RULE EFFECTIVE?
Effective Date – July 1, 2020
TICK
TOCK
5. March 20, 2020 - Enacted
May 26, 2021 - Terminated
§ 191, § 192 & § 195 Stay Due to COVID 19
ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
6. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 191.23 & 191.25 Reporting Safety-Related Conditions
What’s New?
Clarifies the SRC reporting requirement for pipeline
operational pressures that exceed MAOP (plus buildup)
• Required information
• Reporting timeframes
• Contact information
Key Exceptions
Gathering Lines
Distribution lines
LNG facilities
7. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
What is the Impact?
The impact is LOW
Modify O&M manual to reflect reporting requirements
§ 191.23 & 191.25 Reporting Safety-Related Conditions
8. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.3 Definitions
What’s New?
Adds definitions for:
• Engineering Critical Assessment (ECA)
• Moderate Consequence Area (MCA)
Key Exceptions
Traceable, Verifiable and Complete (TVC) definition not
included rule
Defined in the preamble to the rule
Examples given
9. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.3 Definitions (cont.)
Engineering Critical Assessment (ECA)
A documented analytical procedure based on
• Fracture mechanics principles
• Relevant material properties (mechanical and fracture
resistance properties)
• Operating history, operational environment and in-service
degradation
• Possible failure mechanisms
• Initial and final defect sizes
• Usage of future operating and maintenance
procedures to determine the maximum tolerable
sizes for imperfections based upon the
pipeline segment MAOP
10. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.3 Definitions (cont.)
Moderate Consequence Area (MCA)
An onshore area that is within a potential impact radius (PIR),
as defined in § 192.903, containing either
• Five or more buildings intended for human occupancy; or
• A principal, arterial roadway with 4 or more lanes,
including any portion of the paved surface, including
shoulders, of a designated interstate, other freeway, or
expressway (National Highway System).
December 2012
11. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Review ECA process to determine if beneficial to use
Define pipeline moderate consequence areas
§ 192.3 Definitions
12. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.7 What documents are incorporated by reference partly or
wholly in this part?
What’s New?
Incorporated by reference
• ANSI/ASNT ILI-PQ-2005(2010), “In-line Inspection
Personnel Qualification and Certification”
• AGA, Pipeline Research Committee Project
PR-3-805, (R-STRENG)
Key Exceptions
None
13. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
• What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify ILI procedures to reflect new requirements
§ 192.7 What documents are incorporated by reference partly or
wholly in this part?
14. § 192.9 What requirements apply to gathering lines?
What’s New?
Specifically exempts gathering lines from the requirements
enacted as part of this rule
Key Exceptions
192.67 – Materials; Record collection and record maintenance
192.127 – Pipe Design and § 192.205 - Pipeline Components
192.619 – MAOP
192.227 – Qualification of Welders (Type A Only)
192.517 – Records: Tests
192.750 – Launcher and receiver safety
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
15. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Gathering line requirements to be addressed
in future rules
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.9 What requirements apply to gathering lines?
16. § 192.18 How to notify PHMSA (New Section)
What’s New?
Provides contact information to notify PHMSA
• Requires a 90-day advance notification if the operator
intends to employ an alternate integrity assessment
method, analytical method, sampling approach, or
technique (i.e., “other technology”)
• Operator may proceed with the proposed other
technology unless notified otherwise by PHMSA
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
17. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify O&M manual to reflect new requirements
Modify IMP to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.18 How to notify PHMSA (New Section)
18. § 192.67 Records: Material Properties (New Section)
What’s New?
Steel transmission pipelines installed
• After July 1, 2020 - Retain all records for the life of the pipeline
• Prior to July 1, 2020 - Retain any such records for the life of the
pipeline
Record requirements
• Document the physical characteristics of the steel transmission
pipeline, including diameter, yield, UTS, wall thickness, seam
type, and chemical composition
Includes all tests, inspections, and attributes required at the time
the pipe was manufactured.
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
19. What is the Impact?
The impact is MODERATE
Update record retention practices to reflect new
requirements
Modify GIS schema to reflect TVC requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.67 Records: Material Properties (New Section)
20. § 192.127 Records: Pipe Design (New Section)
What’s New?
Steel transmission pipelines installed
• After July 1, 2020 - Retain records for the life of the
pipeline
• Prior to July 1, 2020 - Retain any such records for the life of
the pipeline
External pressure and loads
• 192.103 Pipe Design – General
Design pressure
• 192.105 Design Formula
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
21. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Update record retention practices to reflect new
requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.127 Records: Pipe Design (New Section)
22. § 192.205 Records: Pipeline Components (New Section)
What’s New?
Steel transmission pipelines installed
• After July 1, 2020 - Retain records for the life of the
pipeline
• Prior to July 1, 2020 - Retain any such records for the life of
the pipeline
Valve manufacturing and pressure rating records
Applies to flanges, fittings, branch connections, extruded
outlets, anchor forgings, and other components where
• SMYS ≥ 40 ksi and Diameter > 2 inches
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
23. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Update record retention practices to reflect new
requirements
Modify GIS schema to reflect TVC requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.205 Records: Pipeline Components (New Section)
24. § 192.150 Passage of Internal Inspection Devices
What’s New?
NACE SP0102, In-Line Inspection of Pipelines, incorporated by
reference
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
25. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Review and compare NACE SP0102 with existing ILI
procedures
Modify ILI procedures to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.150 Passage of Internal Inspection Devices
26. § 192.227 Qualification of Welders
What’s New?
Steel pipelines
• Maintain individual welder qualifications for a minimum of
5 years post construction
• Will also apply to Type A gathering systems
Effective July 1, 2021
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
27. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Update record retention practices to reflect new
requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.227 Qualification of Welders
28. § 192.285 Plastic Pipe: Qualifying Persons to Make Joints
What’s New?
Non-metallic pipelines
• Maintain individual pipeline joining qualifications for a
minimum of 5 years post construction
Effective July 1, 2021
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
29. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Update record retention practices to reflect new
requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.285 Plastic Pipe: Qualifying Persons to Make Joints
30. § 192.493 In-Line Inspection of Pipelines (New Section)
What’s New?
Incorporated by reference
• API 1163, In-Line Inspection Systems Qualification
Standard
• ANSI/ASNT ILI-PQ, In-Line Inspection Personnel
Qualification and Certification
• NACE SP0102, In-Line Inspection of Pipelines
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
31. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Review and compare standards with existing ILI procedures
Modify ILI procedures to reflect new requirements
(validation)
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.493 In-Line Inspection of Pipelines (New Section)
32. § 192.506 Transmission lines: Spike Hydrostatic Pressure Test
(New Section Added)
What’s New?
Defines the requirements steel pipeline spike hydrostatic test
• SMYS ≥ 30%
• Test medium = Water
• Test duration = 8 hours min
• Spike test pressure to lesser of 1.5 times MAOP or 100%
SMYS and hold for 15 minutes (within first two hours of
test)
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
33. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Review and compare standards with existing hydro
procedures
Modify hydro procedures to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.506 Transmission lines: Spike Hydrostatic Pressure Test
(New Section Added)
34. § 192.619 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure:
Steel or Plastic Pipelines (Records)
What’s New?
Steel transmission pipelines installed
• After July 1, 2020 - Retain records for the life of the
pipeline
• Prior to July 1, 2020 - Retain any such records for the life
of the pipeline
(a)(4) MAOP reconfirmation (§ 192.624) required to address
record retention gaps
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
35. What is the Impact?
The Impact is HIGH
Identify all pipeline sections where MAOP verification gaps
exists
Review records for compliance to TVC standard
Link TVC records to GIS segments
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.619 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure:
Steel or Plastic Pipelines (Records)
36. § 192.607 Verification of Pipeline Material Properties and
Attributes: Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
What’s New?
In and of itself, § 192.607 adds no new requirements
• Only required for § 192.619 MAOP re-confirmation
Defines requirements for verification of steel transmission
pipeline material properties and attributes
• Maintain records for life of pipeline
• Records must be traceable, verifiable, complete (TVC)
• Develop procedure to verify incomplete records via
destructive or non-destructive tests
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
37. § 192.607 Verification of Pipeline Material Properties and
Attributes: Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines. (New Section)
What’s New?
Testing may be performed at opportune times
• Anomaly direct examination
• In Situ evaluations
• Repairs, remediations & maintenance digs
• Excavations associated with replacements or relocations
Non-destructive and destructive test requirements
• Minimum Yield Strength (SMYS)
• Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS)
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
38. § 192.607 Verification of Pipeline Material Properties and
Attributes: Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
What’s New?
Sampling program for pipeline sections where information is
incomplete
• Populations of common characteristics & age (FAQ-18)
• Tests required per population is 1 per mile or 150 total,
whichever is less
• Prior tests may be utilized
• Unexpected or non-confirmatory results
• Expanded sampling program @ 95% confidence level
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
39. § 192.607 Verification of Pipeline Material Properties and
Attributes: Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
What’s New?
Component material verification
• Required for
◦ Diameter > 2”
◦ SMYS ≥ 42 ksi
◦ Cannot be isolated from pipeline
• Not required for
◦ Compressor, meter & regulator stations
◦ Separators
◦ River crossing headers
◦ MLV’s and valve operator piping
◦ Cross-connection isolation valves
• Verify ANSI pressure ratings
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
40. § 192.607 Verification of Pipeline Material Properties and
Attributes: Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
Key Exceptions
None
What is the Impact?
The Impact VARIES
Depends on presence or absence of TVC records
Develop sampling program for unexpected results
How many digs are sufficient to comply?
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
41. § 192.619 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure:
Steel or Plastic Pipelines
What’s New?
MAOP modifications
• Class 1 safety factor raised from 1.1 to 1.25 for pipe
installed after effective date
• Applies to Type A & Type B gathering lines
• MAOP established under§ 192.619 (a)(4) must account for
the material property requirements under § 192.607
• May be required to re-confirm the MAOP of the pipeline
under the new section § 192.624
• Comply with new MAOP record retention requirements
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
42. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Modify design procedures to reflect new safety factor
requirements
May be required to reconfirm MAOP due to incomplete TVC
records
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.619 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure:
Steel or Plastic Pipelines
43. § 192.624 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure Re-Confirmation:
Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
What’s New?
Steel pipeline MAOP reconfirmation required for
• § 192.619(a) MAOP establishment – Incomplete TVC records
and pipeline is located in:
◦ A High Consequence Area (HCA); or
◦ A Class 3 or Class 4 location
• § 192.619(c) MAOP establishment (grandfather clause) - SMYS
≥ 30% and pipeline is located in
◦ A High Consequence Area (HCA); or
◦ A Class 3 or Class 4 location; or
◦ A Moderate Consequence Area (MCA), if piggable
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
44. What’s New?
MAOP re-confirmation compliance deadlines
• July 1, 2021 - Develop MAOP re-confirmation procedures
• July 3, 2028 - Complete 50% of re-confirmations
• July 2, 2035 – Complete 100% of re-confirmations
• 4 years maximum post pipeline segment category change
or pipeline segment falls into category requiring MAOP
re-confirmation
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.624 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure Re-Confirmation:
Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
45. What’s New?
MAOP re-confirmation methods
• Pressure test and TVC records for diameter, wall thickness,
seam type and grade (Design Calc)
• Pressure reduction – 5 year lookback with safety factor
applied
◦ Highest operating pressure
◦ Low Stress Pipelines - Highest operating pressure
combined with periodic patrol and leak survey
• § 192.632 Engineering Critical Assessment
• Pipe replacement
• Alternative technology
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.624 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure Re-Confirmation:
Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
46. Key Exceptions
None
What is the Impact?
The Impact is HIGH
Develop MAOP re-confirmation process
• Review all pipeline records from one end to the other
• For entire pipeline, not just required area
• Update GIS data base
Verify MAOP re-confirmation methods comply with
allowable methods
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.624 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure Re-Confirmation:
Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
47. § 192.632 Engineering Critical Assessment for Maximum Allowable
Operating Pressure Re-Confirmation:
Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
What’s New?
New MAOP confirmation method - ECA
• Conservative assumptions used for missing TVC values
• Analyze & determine defect predicted failure pressure
• MAOP is determined by lowest predicted failure pressure
with safety factor applied
Key Exceptions
None
“Path” to utilize where hydro records are incomplete
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
48. What is the Impact?
Identify any segments that require cyclic fatigue or crack /
crack like defect threat analysis.
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.632 Engineering Critical Assessment for Maximum Allowable
Operating Pressure Re-Confirmation:
Onshore Steel Transmission Pipelines (New Section)
49. § 192.710 Transmission lines: Assessments Outside of High
Consequence Areas (New Section)
What’s New?
Assessment outside HCA’s where:
• SMYS ≥ 30%
• Class 3 or Class 4 areas
• MCA, if piggable
Deadline - July 3, 2034 or 10 years post segment categorization
Reassessment interval – 10 years
Methods - ILI, hydro, spike hydro, direct examination,
DA, and GWUT
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
50. What is the Impact?
The Impact is HIGH
Modify O&M to reflect new requirements (Not part of
Subpart O)
Define pipeline moderate consequence areas
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.710 Transmission lines: Assessments Outside of High
Consequence Areas (New Section)
51. § 192.712 Analysis of Predicted Failures (New Section)
What’s New?
Defect failure pressure analysis
• Corrosion - ASME/ANSI B31G or R-STRENG
• Cracks and Crack Like Defects - Models
Crack growth models
• TVC records include CVN data (§ 192.607)
• Defect stability
• Remaining life
• Precision / accuracy of assessment data
• Conservative assumptions until assessed
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
52. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MEDIUM
Determine susceptibility to cracks and crack like defects
Modify O&M procedures to incorporate new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.712 Analysis of Predicted Failures (New Section)
53. § 192.750 Launcher and Receiver Safety (New Section)
What’s New?
July 1, 2021 – Launchers and receivers equipped with pressure
relief device
Key Exceptions
None
What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Verify all ILI launchers and receivers comply with new safety
standards
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
54. § 192.909 How Can an Operator Change its Integrity
Management Program?
What’s New?
Revised to reference PHMSA notification requirements under
the new section § 192.18
Key Exceptions
None
What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
55. § 192.917 How Does an Operator Identify Potential Threats to Pipeline
Integrity and Use the Threat Identification in its Integrity Program?
What’s New?
Seismicity, geology and soil stability
Emphasis
Cyclic fatigue analysis (7 year interval)
Manufacturing defect stability
Prove it by pressure test
ERW pipe section reference § 192.712 (Failure Pressure
Analysis)
Cracks and crack like defects (New Section)
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
56. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Document why some threats are not or have not been
considered
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.917 How Does an Operator Identify Potential Threats to Pipeline
Integrity and Use the Threat Identification in its Integrity Program?
57. § 192.921 How is the Baseline Assessment to be Conducted?
What’s New?
ILI assessment requirements
New section
Assessments Added
Spike hydro pressure test
Excavation and in-situ
Guided wave
MAOP re-confirmation
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
58. What is the Impact?
The Impact is MODERATE
Review IMP with regard to manufacturing defects, time
dependent threats, cyclic fatigue threats, and crack & crack
like defect threats
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.921 How is the Baseline Assessment to be Conducted?
59. § 192.935 What Additional Preventive and Mitigative Measures
Must an Operator Take?
What’s New?
Outside force damage
Emphasis
Includes loading, longitudinal / lateral forces and seismicity of
the area
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
60. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
Modify risk model to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.935 What Additional Preventive and Mitigative Measures
Must an Operator Take?
61. § 192.937 What is a Continual Process of Evaluation and
Assessment to Maintain a Pipeline's Integrity?
What’s New?
Aligned with Threats (§ 192.917)
Assessments Added
• Excavation and in-situ
• Guided wave
• MAOP re-confirmation
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
62. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.937 What is a Continual Process of Evaluation and
Assessment to Maintain a Pipeline's Integrity?
63. § 192.939 What are the Required Reassessment Intervals?
What’s New?
Revised to reference PHMSA notification requirements under
the new section § 192.18
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
64. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ 192.939 What are the Required Reassessment Intervals?
65. § 192.949 How does an Operator Notify PHMSA [Removed and
Reserved]
What’s New?
Removed and replaced with new section § 192.18
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
66. WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
§ 192.949 How does an Operator Notify PHMSA [Removed and
Reserved]
67. § Appendix F to Part 192–Criteria for Conducting Integrity Assessments
Using Guided Wave Ultrasonic Testing (GWUT) (New Section)
What’s New?
Added Appendix F for GWUT assessment
Key Exceptions
None
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
68. What is the Impact?
The Impact is LOW
No longer an alternative technology that requires approval
Modify IMP manual to reflect new requirements
WHAT’S IN THE RULE?
§ Appendix F to Part 192–Criteria for Conducting Integrity Assessments
Using Guided Wave Ultrasonic Testing (GWUT) (New Section)
69. Future Rules: The Rule does not include many changes to Parts 191
and 192 that PHMSA proposed at earlier points in the proceedings
and will be included in future rules:
WHAT’S NOT IN THE RULE?
Mega Rule Part 2:
Repair criteria in HCAs
Creation of new repair criteria for non-HCAs
Requirements for inspecting pipelines following extreme events
Updates to pipeline corrosion control requirements
Codification of a management of change process
Clarification of certain other IMP requirements
Strengthening IMP assessment requirements
70. Mega Rule Part 3:
Requirements related to gas gathering lines that
were proposed in the NPRM
WHAT’S NOT IN THE RULE?
Future Rules: The Rule does not include many changes to Parts 191 and
192 that PHMSA proposed at earlier points in the proceedings and will
be included in future rules:
71. Bryan Louque, P.E.
Vice President, Asset Integrity & Corrosion
D: 918.514.5879 C: 913.221.3446
blouque@auduboncompanies.com
auduboncompanies.com
Any Questions?
Webinar recording and presentation
will be emailed in 24-48 hours
Editor's Notes
Failure Story
September 2010
Rupture of 30” diameter gas pipeline. Resulting crater, 72’ long x 26’ wide
Release ignited after the rupture
Resulted in 8 fatalities, sent about 50 to the hospital and destroyed 37 homes, damaged 70 others.
Technical Cause – Fracture of longitudinal weld seam. Operator records indicated seamless pipe. Findings indicated DSAW and SSAW pipe was used.
NTSB Probable Cause
- Inadequate QA/QC during construction (1956)
- Inadequate IM program
Contributing Causes
- CPUC failed to detect inadequacies in operators IM program.
- PHMSA IM inspection protocols need improvement
7) NTSB Recommendations to:
- PHMSA
- Operator
- CPUC
1) Make an effort to relate effectiveness of new rule as a potential mitigative measure to causal failure.
1) Make an effort to relate effectiveness of new rule as a potential mitigative measure to causal failure.
Low, Med, High subjective scale
- How much work / organizational disruption with the regulation result in?
Traceable records are those which can be clearly linked to original information about a pipeline segment or facility. Traceable records might include pipe mill records, which include mechanical and chemical properties; purchase requisition; or as-built documentation indicating minimum pipe yield strength, seam type, wall thickness and diameter. Careful attention should be given to records transcribed from original documents as they may contain errors. Information from a transcribed document, in many cases, should be verified with complementary or supporting documents.
Verifiable records are those in which information is confirmed by other complementary, but separate, documentation. Verifiable records might include contract specifications for a pressure test of a pipeline segment complemented by pressure charts or field logs. Another example might include a purchase order to a pipe mill with pipe specifications verified by a metallurgical test of a coupon pulled from the same pipeline segment. In general, the only acceptable use of an affidavit would be as a complementary document, prepared and signed at the time of the test or inspection by a qualified individual who observed the test or inspection being performed.
Complete records are those in which the record is finalized as evidenced by a signature, date or other appropriate marking such as a corporate stamp or seal. For example, a complete pressure testing record should identify a specific segment of pipe, who conducted the test, the duration of the test, the test medium, temperatures, accurate pressure readings, and elevation information as applicable. An incomplete record might reflect that the pressure test was initiated, failed and restarted without conclusive indication of a successful test. A record that cannot be specifically linked to an individual pipeline segment is not a complete record for that segment. Incomplete or partial records are not an adequate basis for establishing MAOP or MOP. If records are unknown or unknowable, a more conservative approach is indicated. For example, a mill test report must be traceable, verifiable, and complete, which is a typical record for pipelines. For the mill test report to be traceable it would need to be dated in the same time frame as construction or have some other link relating the mill record to the material installed in the pipeline, such as a work order or project identification. For the mill test report to be verified, it would need to be confirmed by the purchase or project specification for the pipeline or the alignment sheet with consistent information. Such an example would be verified by independent records. For the mill test report to be complete, it must be signed, stamped, or otherwise authenticated as a genuine and true record of the material by the source of the record or information, in this example it could be the pipe mill, supplier, or testing lab. Another common record is a pressure test record, which must be traceable, verifiable, and complete. For the pressure test record to be traceable, it would need to identify a specific and unique segment of pipe that was tested (such as mileposts, survey stations, etc.) or have some other link relating the pressure test to the physical location of the test segment, such as a work order, project identification, or alignment sheet. For the pressure test record to be verified, it would need to be confirmed by the purchase or project specification for the pipeline or the alignment sheet with consistent information. Such an example would be verified by independent records. For the pressure test record to be complete, it should identify a specific segment of pipe, who conducted the test, the duration of the test, the test medium, temperatures, accurate pressure readings, elevation information, and any other information required by § 192.517, as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on Gas Transmission Final Rule Page 12 of 16 applicable. An incomplete record might reflect that the pressure test was initiated, failed and restarted without conclusive indication of a successful test.
I-77 Gas Pipeline Rupture and Fire – West Virginia.
I-77 Closed in Both Directions for Approximately 18 Hours. Heat melted the concrete.
Technical Cause – External Corrosion
Root Cause – Lack of Inspection (Pipeline Was Not Piggable)
Contributing Cause – Control Room Did Not Recognize the Rupture, No ASV or RCV’s to quickly isolation section.
There is no comprehensive GIS-based source of roadways as defined in the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Highway Functional Classification Concepts, Criteria and Procedures, Section 3.1 (see: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/statewide/related/highway_functional_classificatio ns/fcauab.pdf). However, Section 4 of the FHWA document includes recommendations and guidance on how to obtain GIS-based roadway inventory data at a state level. PHMSA does not intend to develop a single source of data for operators to use to determine if an MCA exists on their pipeline system.
A spike test is appropriate and should be considered for time-dependent threats, such as the following: stress corrosion cracking; selective seam weld corrosion; manufacturing and related defects, including defective pipe and pipe seams; and, other forms of defect or damage involving cracks or crack-like defects, such as those listed in §§ 192.710(c)(3), 192.917(e)(6) and 192.937(c)(3).
The opportunistic gathering of data on unknown material properties does not need to meet the MAOP reconfirmation schedule outlined in § 192.624(b), except when the selected MAOP reconfirmation method requires material properties testing to reconfirm the MAOP.
FAQ-18. When determining separate pipe “populations” for conducting a verifiable material properties and attributes sampling program that satisfies § 192.607(e)(1), must an operator compare the dates of manufacture and construction together, or must the manufacture and construction dates be compared separately? For example, would two segments of pipe that were manufactured in the same year but were installed together, 3 years after manufacture, be in the same population? As a second example, would two segments of pipe that were manufactured in the same year but installed 3 years apart be in the same population?
When determining the vintage of two potentially similar pipeline segments (e.g., same diameter, wall thickness, grade, and seam type), operators must consider the following: If the difference between either the manufacturing date of the two segments or the construction date of the two segments is greater than 2 years, the two segments cannot be considered similar and must be placed in separate populations per the mandate in § 192.607(e)(1). In the first example, the two pipe segments would be in the same population. In the second example, the operator would not be able to place the two pipe segments in the same population unless additional records demonstrate traceability to another population of pipe.
Operators must verify diameter, wall thickness, seam type, and grade (e.g., yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, or pressure rating for valves and flanges, etc.), and Charpy v-notch toughness values (if needed), if these items are unknown and are necessary for MAOP reconfirmation (per § 192.624), an engineering critical assessment (per § 192.632), or failure pressure analysis (per § 192.712), as specified by those regulations.
This statement means the 8-hour period does not need to be continuous; it can be made up of shorter periods that over the course of 30-days amount to at least 8 hours above a certain pressure. Per §§ 192.624(c)(2) and (c)(5)(i), the value used as the highest actual sustained operating pressure must account for differences between upstream and downstream pressure on the pipeline by use of either the lowest maximum pressure value for the entire pipeline segment or using the operating pressure gradient along the entire pipeline segment (i.e., the location specific operating pressure at each location) that is protected from over-pressuring (see §§ 192.199 and 192.201).