Transcript Slide 1

Pipeline Safety and
Reauthorization
Pipeline Safety Trust conference
November 4, 2010
Perspectives of liquid pipeline operators
• No accidents are acceptable
• Safety record has improved over the decade
– Inside and outside HCAs
– All leading causes (corrosion, equipment,
materials/seams, operator error, excavation damage)
• “Annus Horriblus”
– Major project (Keystone XL) opposed partly because
of non-pipeline energy policy concerns
– Deepwater Horizon, even though not a pipeline
accident
– And then Marshall, MI, and San Bruno, CA
Perspective on the MI and CA accidents
• Operators say “I don’t want that to happen to us”
• Operators are eager for NTSB findings
– What happened and how do we prevent it?
– Will the findings identify any regulatory gaps?
• Industry works to learn from accidents
– PPTS, Performance Excellence Team, Data Mining
Team, Pipeline Information eXchange (PIX),
Safety Culture workshops
• PHMSA has many tools and is not afraid to use them
Incentives to avoid a release
•
•
•
•
•
•
Injury to public, employees, contractors
Clean-up costs
Claims and litigation
Penalties and fines
Reputation hurt with regulators
Lost business; reputation with shippers
Dramatic Improvement:
Liquids Pipeline Industry Onshore Pipe Spill Record
Number of Spills per 1,000 Miles
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Barrels Released per 1,000 Miles
800
2.0
629
600
-48%
-63%
400
330
0.7
0.5
200
0.0
0
'01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08
'01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08
3-Year Averages Ending in Year Shown
Source: Pipeline Performance Tracking System, a voluntary spill
reporting system involving 85% of the U.S. liquids pipeline mileage.
Percentage decline from 1999-2001 average to 2006-2008 average.
Public concerns about
‘aging infrastructure’
• Data shows no specific trends
– Some accidents on older pipe not caused by
time-dependent factors
• Very long lives if properly constructed, operated,
maintained, and protected
– Operators focus on specific construction
methods, coatings, welding practices, etc.
• Thankful for recognition of this by others
– But we need to find a better way to explain
that
Focus in Reauthorization
• Excavation damage prevention (One-call
exemptions)
• Improving the NRC telephonic notification regime
• Maintain focus on protecting against the greatest
risks
• Any requirements should have a technical and
engineering basis and enhance safety
• Avoid creating security risks
• Remember the leading causes of accidents are
already covered by regulations
PPTS Onshore Pipe Incidents
'99-'08 (3-year Average)
TOTAL, ALL CAUSES
300
CORROSION
150
250
200
100
150
100
50
‘08
EQUIP./NON-PIPE
0
20
30
15
20
10
10
5
0
THIRD PARTY
40
50
’01
0
40
50
’01
‘08
0
30
20
’01
‘08
OPERATOR/OPER'N
10
0
30
’01
‘08
MAT'L/SEAM/WELD
25
20
15
10
’01
‘08
5
0
’01
‘08
Excavation damage prevention
• Causes 7% of all incidents
• Leading cause of injuries and deaths
• Exemptions have seemed to surprise
Congress
• Common message among stakeholders
• Great starts in PHMSA ANPRM and S. 3856
(Lautenberg-Rockefeller)
Telephonic reporting
• Rigid National Response Center rules create a
conflict between the need to report and the need to
estimate
– Operators must estimate release volume
– Operators cannot revise a report
• Options to make immediate reporting more
practicable
– Allow revisions of estimates
– Estimate ranges initially, not specific amounts
• A possible common goal for work together
Ways we can work together
• PIPA promotion
• Damage prevention
– States, PHMSA, Congress
• Notification process reforms
• Continued discussion of leading indicators and
concerns
• Continued discussion of perspectives
Thank you
Andy Black
President and CEO
Association of Oil Pipe Lines (AOPL)
202 292 4500 phone
[email protected]
www.aopl.org