Pipeline Safety Trust 2015 Annual Conference Pipeline Cracking & Leak Management Ken Lee – Director, Engineering & Research Division 1

PHMSA appreciates industry efforts to develop: Recommended Practice 1176: Assessment and Management of Pipeline Cracking Recommended Practice 1175: Pipeline Leak Detection Program Management

New API Crack & Leak RPs RPs provide valuable guidance & insight PHMSA is reviewing drafts and providing feedback to API PHMSA will review final RP and may consider for possible future incorporation by reference (entirety or portions)

Recent Incidents Highlighting Crack and Leak Detection Issues Carmichael, MS San Bruno, CA Marshall, MI Mayflower, AR Allentown, PA

Pipeline Cracking Challenges One of the top causes of pipeline failures Many cracks are difficult to detect with current inline inspection tools. In liquid pipelines, fatigue crack growth occurs from pressure cycling Current models may not predict failure

Leak Detection Challenges Small leaks may be difficult to detect, especially in pipelines of: High volumes (> 10,000 barrels/ hour) Delivering batched or varying products Locations having other hydrocarbon sources Valve closure time

Table 1─Visualization of an Example LDP Leak Detection Table 1─Visualization of an Example LDP   Leak Type SCADA Monitoring CPM Public Awareness Aerial Surveillance In-line inspection Leak Rate ð Rupture ü N/A Medium Leak O Small Leak X Seep Time-to-Detect ð Detection Probable Detection Possible Detection Improbable

Leak Detection Systems   Externally-Based Internally-Based Physical Inspection Sensor-Based Monitoring Manual Observations Computational Pipeline Monitoring Non-Continuous Aerial Surveillance Ground Penetrating Radar Volume or Line Balance Calculations Ground Based Line Surveillance Sniffer Tubes Hydraulic Calculations Hydro Testing Tracer Chemicals Pattern Recognition Satellite Intelligent Pigs Shut-in Testing/Stand-up Testing  One Call System/ Public Awareness Soil Sampling Continuous Sensing Cables Controller SCADA Monitoring Conservation of Mass (real time) Cameras Real Time Line Balance Chemical Analyzers Pressure Monitoring Acoustic Sensors CP Monitoring Digital Signal Analysis Statistical Analysis

PHMSA Public Workshops Managing Pipeline Cracking Challenges Workshop August 5, 2014 (Chicago, IL) Improving Pipeline Leak Detection Effectiveness March 27, 2012 (Washington, DC)

Crack & Leak Management PHMSA is taking many approaches, including: Rulemaking Standards development Research

Regulations Research

Pipeline Safety RD&T Program Mission: To sponsor research and development projects focused on providing near-term solutions that will improve the safety, reduce environmental impact, and enhance the reliability of the Nation’s pipeline transportation system. Key Points We employ a collaborative approach to address mutual challenges We help remove technical barriers on a given challenge We measure our research results/impacts We are transparent - http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/rd/ Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 established our modern program

RD&T Program Objectives Developing Technology Strengthening Consensus Standards Promoting Knowledge Fostering the development of new technologies so that pipeline operators can improve safety performance and more effectively address regulatory requirements. Targeting and feeding new knowledge into the process of keeping standards relevant to their purpose. Generating and promoting general knowledge to decision makers. Authorizations vs. Appropriations FY 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Authorization: $10M $11.7M $6.92M Appropriation: $4.8M $7.5M $7.8M $7.7M $6.9M $5.8M $12.3M

Performance Metrics (since 2002) 231 Projects, $90M PHMSA + $85M Resource Sharing Performance Metrics (since 2002)

Guided Wave Ultrasonics PHMSA RD&T SUCCESSES Courtesy: CRC Evens Courtesy: Pipetel Technologies Courtesy: LASEN Courtesy: ITT Kodak Guided Wave Ultrasonics Courtesy: Pure Technologies Leak Detection Gas/Liq Leak Detection by Fixed Wing/ Helicopter along pipeline Hand-Held Tools for In-Ditch Inspections

ERW Pipe Seam Study

Lessons Learned – Steel Pipe Data integration Conservative approach in sizing Tool tolerances Interaction of crack growth Material properties: toughness Fatigue crack growth model to predict remaining life Combination of tools: ILI, Direct, & Pressure Test Continuous reassessment

Improving In Ditch Methods

Full Scale Testing to Improve Models

Leak Detection Research

Research is pointing to: X One size does not fit all

Summary Improving Crack & Leak Detection: Remain to be difficult issues Are a high priority A one-size-fits-all solution is not likely Appropriate use of multiple tools may be needed

Thank you phmsa.dot.gov kenneth.lee@dot.gov 23