Transcript NACE Corrosion - 2008 - Western Regional Gas Conference

Agency Update: PHMSA
2009 Western Regional
Gas Conference
Tempe, AZ
August 25, 2009
Great Conference Line-Up
• Regulatory Updates
° DIMP, CRM, MAOP, Environmental
• Focus on Critically Important Issues
°
°
°
°
°
°
Emergency Response
Damage Prevention
Operator Qualification
New Technology Deployment
Research
Improved Land Use Planning Near Pipelines
Discussion Topics for Today
• A Bit on OPS & PHMSA
° Who’s on First, What’s on Second
• Some Stage Setting Comments
° Including Some Comments on Energy
° A Perspective on Reauthorization
• A Macro View of Safety Data
° Specific Comments on Role of Data and
Particularly Incident Notification/Reporting
• Quick Survey of Regulatory and NonRegulatory Initiatives
° Emphasis on DIMP
° Emphasis on Damage Prevention
Setting the Stage
• Introductions - PHMSA Leadership
°
°
°
°
°
°
°
°
Cynthia Quarterman – Administrator (nom.)
Vacant – Deputy Administrator
Vacant – Chief Counsel
Cindy Douglass – Chief Safety Officer
Jeff Wiese – Associate Administrator
Vacant – Deputy Associate Administrator(s)
Chris Hoidal – Western Region Director
4 Other Regional Directors: S, C, E, and SW
Setting the Stage
• PHMSA Directors
°
°
°
°
°
°
Zach Barrett – State Programs
Rod Dyck – Enforcement
Steve Fischer – Program Development
John Gale – Regulatory Program
Joy Kadnar – Performance and Evaluation
Blaine Keener – National Field Coordinator
- Stan Kastanas – Drug and Alcohol Prevention
° Roger Little – Data and Information Technology
° Alan Mayberry – Engineering & Emergency Support
° Richard Sanders – Training and Qualification
Our Pipeline Safety Objectives
•
Improve the Overall Integrity and Reliability of the
Energy Pipeline System and Reduce System Risk
° P = R/S + CO + BCA
•
Engage, Lead, and Help Strengthen the Capabilities
of Others Who Share in Achieving our Goals
•
Anticipate Future Needs for Transporting Energy
Products
•
Earns the Respect of Our Stakeholders and the
Public – as a Model Safety Agency
Setting the Stage
• PHMSA’s General Approach
° Focus Heavily on Performance
- Not Solely on Compliance
° Drive Performance Through Attention to
- Pipeline
- Process
- People
° Advance “Risk-Focused and Data Driven”
- Risk Identification is KEY First Step
- Need Operator’s Help if All Are to Improve
° Use an “Enterprise” Approach
° Strive to be Engaged and Communicative
° Create a Nucleus for Building Partnerships
Setting the Stage
• Current Events and Worries
° Heavily Driven by Accidents
- Daily by excavation damage
» Increasingly in shared ROW’s
» Construction boom is worrisome
- Periodically, but notably, by corrosion failures
» E.g., Alaska, Louisiana
° Increasingly Driven by Supply Issues
° Congressional Attention Keeps us Busy
- PIPES Act Mandates
- Hearings
- Audits and Recommendations
Pipeline Safety Reauthorization
• Quadrennial Check-Up
• Basic Ingredient Checklist
° Execution of Last Mandates
- E.g., DIMP, CRM, Reporting, Damage Prevention,
Community Assistance, Increases in State Funding
° Responsiveness to Outside Auditors/Reviewers
- NTSB, DOT’s IG, GAO
» E.g., DIMP, CRM, Reporting
° Stakeholder Temperature Check
- AGA, AOPL, APGA, API, INGAA, NAPSR, NARUC
° The Unexpected, High Profile Event
° Concerns About Critical Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
° Consensus Needs to Fill Gaps
The long term trend
Where we are now
Pipeline Incidents Involving
Death or Major Injury (1988-2009
Pipeline Incidents Involving Death or Injury
(Cumulative - YTD vs. Last Year)
50
100
90
Trendline (-10% every 3 years)
40
80
70
38
FY2008
30
60
FY 2009
Targets
50
43 42
40 38
40
20
Target = 38
30
10
20
10
0
0
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
PHMSA Incident data, as of Aug. 28, 2008
Pipeline Safety: Context Measures
Change from 1988 (Index = 1)
1.6
U.S. population
1.4
1.2
Energy
consumption
1.0
0.8
Pipeline
Mileage
0.6
All Pipeline
ton-miles
0.4
0.2
0.0
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
Incidents
w/death or
injury
Data and Projections: Census Bureau, Energy Information Administration, BTS ton-mile
estimates, PHMSA Incident and Annual Report Data, as of Jan. 5, 2009
2008
(p)
10/1 11/1 12/1
1/1
2/1
3/1
4/1
5/1
Date of Incident
6/1
7/1
8/1
9/1
Data as of July 1, 2009
With 8 months of data so far, we are already at 95% of the target (36
year-to-date vs. 29 last year); there is also one incident reported for June so
far. All three sectors (liquid, transmission, and distribution) are higher.
Achieving our goal will be a major challenge.
Over the past 20 years, gas
distribution systems have
accounted for 78% of
pipeline incidents involving
death or injury; gas
transmission
systems
accounted for 13%, and
hazardous liquid systems
accounted for 9%.
Pipeline Incidents Involving Death/Injury
By Sector, 1988-2008 (projected
80
60
Hazardous
Liquid (9%)
40
20
0
Gas
Transmission
(13%)
Gas
Distribution
(78%)
Source: DOT/PHMSA Incident Data as of Jan. 5, 2009
The long term trend
Pipeline Incidents Caused by
Corrosion or Excavation (2002-2009)
Where we are now
Pipeline Incidents Caused by Excavation
or Corrosion (Cumulative - YTD vs. Last Year)
200
250
64
200
42
34
150
31
130
100
38
119
37
40
50
66
150
32
50
44
Gas
Distribution
29
100
46
112
107
99
94
50
Gas
Transmission
80
FY 2008
50
FY 2009
Haz Liquid
Target = 141
0
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
10/1
2007 2008(p) 2009
11/1 12/1
1/1
2/1
3/1
4/1
5/1
6/1
7/1
8/1
9/1
Date of Incident
PHMSA Incident data, as of Aug. 28, 2008
Data as of July 1, 2009
We beat our target by a large margin last year (145 vs. 204), and are on track to meet a much more ambitious target in FY 2009, with
103 incidents year-to-date (vs. 108 at the same time last year).
Corrosion and excavation incidents have declined generally in all three pipeline sectors – both corrosion and excavation-related incidents
reached a seven-year low in 2008.
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Incidents
Gas Transmission Pipeline Incidents
Gas Distribution Pipeline Incidents
w/Corrosion or Excavation as the Primary Cause
w/Corrosion or Excavation as the Primary Cause
w/Corrosion or Excavation as the Primary Cause
Corrosion
Excavation
Corrosion
Excavation
Corrosion
120
120
120
100
100
100
80
80
80
60
60
60
40
40
40
20
20
20
0
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
PHMSA Incident Data as of Jan. 5, 2009
Excavation
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
PHMSA Incident Data as of Jan. 5, 2009
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
PHMSA Incident Data as of Jan. 5, 2009
Current Initiatives
• Optional and Required Studies
° Corrosion synthesis report
° Mechanical Damage synthesis report
° Cross Border study
• Regulatory – Recent and Forthcoming
°
°
°
°
80% SMYS / MAOP
DIMP (**)
Control Room Management
Gas IM 7-year reassessment interval (?)
• Non-Regulatory Emphasis
° Excavation Damage Prevention (**)
Regulatory Update
• Distribution Integrity Management
° Status and Outreach
-
Public Website
Web-casts of Key Rule Elements – next slide
Support for State Seminars
Supplement by Attending Other Stakeholders’
Meetings as Necessary
- Workshops to follow final rule
° Special Topic: EFV’s
° Paving the Way
- NAPSR, GPTC Guidance and other supporting
standards, Operator/Industry Efforts, data
improvement efforts, etc.
DIMP Webcast
•
Webcast Outline (4.3 hours)
1. Introduction
2. Baseline and Goals
3. Executive Summary
4. System Description (Paul Preketes)
5. AGF and DIGIT, Earlier Risk Data Analysis,
PHMSA Report to Congress on DIMP, Phase 1
– Organization (Sue Fleck) & Findings,
Developing Rules Guide
6. Rule Content (majority of minutes)
7. PHMSA and State Perspective
8. GPTC Guidance and Relation to NPRM
9. Small Operators
10. Improvements Panel (Sue Fleck)
11. Q&A Panel
12. Next Steps
What Principles Underlie DIMP?
•
DIMP requires operators to better understand
and mitigate system risks
°
°
°
°
•
•
Know your systems
Identify the threats
Rank risks
Mitigate the risks
NPRM does not stipulate specific assessment or
mitigation actions,
In combination with the GPTC Guidance –
NPRM provides direction to operators and
allows the regulator to investigate internal
operator risk management practices
Required Elements
Element
“Commercial”
Operators
Master Meter / LPG
Written Program
Required
Simple (checklist)
Know system
Relevant factors
Location/material
Identify threats
Thorough analysis
Checklist approach
Analyze risk
Required
Not required
Mitigate risk
Required
Required
Performance Measures
7 plus threat-specific
Leaks by cause
Review/revise as
needed
Required
Required
Report Perf Measures
4 measures
Not required
Guidance
• Needed for a high-level performance rule
• GPTC has developed draft guidance
° Several GPTC members and Chair here today
• APGA is developing more-specific
guidance for small operators
Additional Issues
• Allowing alternate time intervals for certain
requirements currently in Part 192
• Plastic Pipe failure reporting
• Consideration of compression coupling
failures in the threat analysis
• Prevention Through People (PTP)
component
Damage Prevention
• Managing the Risks of Excavation Damage
° State Damage Prevention Assistance Program
- Gap Analysis Guidance Document
- State Damage Prevention Program Grant
- Getting Started
°
°
°
°
°
°
°
Position on Federal Enforcement
Common Ground Alliance & Regional Partners
Technology Improvements to One-Call Process
One-Call Center Board Leadership
Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance
Mechanical Damage Study
EDP Technology Development / Deployment
Keeping Me Up At Night
• Loss Of Lifecycle Quality Control
° Pipe, Process, and People
• Malignant Effects of Economic Downturn
° Hesitancy to Investigate, Improve, and Act
• Inadequate Workforce Planning
• The Unexpected
° Can Defend If All Responsible Actions Taken
Upcoming Events – Last Slide!
•
•
•
•
•
•
Casings Workshop
Distribution Construction Workshop
Data Summit
DIMP Implementation Workshop(s)
Public Awareness Program Workshop
Reauthorization of the Pipeline Safety
Program: Hearings, Audits, Posturing
The End
• For more information on PHMSA
° http://www.phmsa.dot.gov
• For more information on Pipeline Safety
° http://ops.dot.gov
• Thanks for your time & enjoy the weather!