Transcript Slide 1

PHMSA Pipeline Incident and IM Data:
What They Do and Do Not Tell Us
Pipeline Safety Trust Conference
November 20, 2008
New Orleans, LA
Carol Parker (Placitas, NM)
Board Member, Pipeline Safety Trust
www.pstrust.org
Lois Epstein, P.E. (Anchorage, AK)
President, LNE Engineering and Policy
1
What’s Happened with Incident
Reporting Since 2000?
• More analysis within and outside of PHMSA to
detect incident causes and trends
• State-level incident data on PHMSA’s website
• Reporting of gross, not just net releases; graphics
show incident trends (more accurate than volume
trends)
• PHMSA’s mapping system offers the opportunity
for geographic analysis of data
2
3
Note: Significant incidents include all serious incidents.
New Mexico All Pipeline Systems: 1998-2008 YTD
Year
Number
Fatalities
Injuries
Property Damage
Gross Barrels Lost
Net Barrels Lost
1998
6
0
1
$352,903
728
637
1999
11
0
1
$1,541,307
6,504
1,086
2000
3
12
0
$1,733,597
2,537
2,250
2001
6
0
5
$413,664
130
2
2002
8
0
0
$314,804
2,540
2,274
2003
7
1
1
$837,777
4,200
1,170
2004
6
0
2
$352,333
1,983
1,927
2005
6
0
1
$463,444
2,794
2,694
2006
5
0
3
$687,747
1,956
791
2007
6
2
0
$995,329
0
0
2008 YTD
6
0
2
$726,623
4,653
4,605
Totals
70
15
16
$8,419,533
28,025
17,436
3 Year Average (20052007)
6
1
1
$715,507
1,583
1,162
5 Year Average (20032007)
6
1
1
$667,327
2,187
1,316
10 Year Average (19982007)
6
2
1
$769,291
2,337
1,283
4
5
What Incident Data Problems Persist?
• Environmental consequences ignored: “significant” and
“serious” incident analyses focus on injuries, fatalities,
and property damage
• Incident data do not include reports from pipelines not
regulated by PHMSA (exempt pipelines, certain offshore
pipelines)
• Too many unknown incident causes reported (see
graphics)
6
7
What Incident Data Problems Persist (continued)?
• Incident reports do not track releases that “could
affect,” versus those that “did affect,” High
Consequence Areas (proposed change)
• Incident reports do not distinguish 1st, 2nd, and 3rd
party damage (proposed change)
• No reporting of mileage of HCA pipe versus nonHCA pipe in each state and nationally – this would
allow comparison of accident rates and a
measurement of effectiveness of HCA measures
8
Solutions to Incident Data Problems
• Track environmental damages
• Analyze and present annual data
• Report HCA mileage versus total mileage of each
type of pipeline for both state and national data
• Unregulated pipelines should be required to report
incidents and mileage to PHMSA
• “Unknown” category should be zero or near zero;
audit reports and fine operators for inadequate reports
• PHMSA accepting comments on revised incident
forms through December 12
9
IM Performance Measure Reporting
• These are relatively new data posted on
PHMSA’s website for hazardous liquid and gas
transmission pipelines
• Performance measures differ for HL and NG
pipelines, with all NG pipeline operators
reporting incidents, leaks, and failures in High
Consequence Areas
10
NG Pipelines Short-Term Results
11
IM Performance Measure Reporting:
Observations
• Reporting incidents, leaks, and failures in HCAs
enhances effectiveness of IM; this performance
measure should be extended to HL pipelines
• Does not evaluate 1st & 2nd party excavation damage
• No unknown incident causes in HCAs?
12