Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines

API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 1160 SECOND EDITION, SEPTEMBER 2013

ERRATA 1, SEPTEMBER 2013

Special Notes

API publications necessarily address problems of a general nature. With respect to particular circumstances, local, state, and federal laws and regulations should be reviewed.

Neither API nor any of API's employees, subcontractors, consultants, committees, or other assignees make any warranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained herein, or assume any liability or responsibility for any use, or the results of such use, of any information or process disclosed in this publication. Neither API nor any of API's employees, subcontractors, consultants, or other assignees represent that use of this publication would not infringe upon privately owned rights.

API publications may be used by anyone desiring to do so. Every effort has been made by the Institute to assure the accuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however, the Institute makes no representation, warranty, or guarantee in connection with this publication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for loss or damage resulting from its use or for the violation of any authorities having jurisdiction with which this publication may conflict.

API publications are published to facilitate the broad availability of proven, sound engineering and operating practices. These publications are not intended to obviate the need for applying sound engineering judgment regarding when and where these publications should be utilized. The formulation and publication of API publications is not intended in any way to inhibit anyone from using any other practices.

Any manufacturer marking equipment or materials in conformance with the marking requirements of an API standard is solely responsible for complying with all the applicable requirements of that standard. API does not represent, warrant, or guarantee that such products do in fact conform to the applicable API standard.

Classified areas may vary depending on the location, conditions, equipment, and substances involved in any given situation. Users of this Recommended Practice should consult with the appropriate authorities having jurisdiction.

Users of this Recommended Practice should not rely exclusively on the information contained in this document. Sound business, scientific, engineering, and safety judgment should be used in employing the information contained herein.

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Contact the Publisher, API Publishing Services, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.

Copyright © 2013 American Petroleum Institute

Foreword

This recommended practice (RP) provides guidance to the pipeline industry for managing pipeline integrity. Pipeline operators are obligated to protect the public, their employees, private property, and the environment from the effects of unintentional releases of petroleum or petroleum products. As part of their commitment to error-free, spill-free operation of liquid petroleum pipelines, operators comply with consensus standards and government regulations in the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of their facilities. Beyond these basic requirements, however, experience has shown that periodic assessment of pipeline integrity (e.g. hydrostatic testing, in-line inspection) and a robust program of preventive and mitigative measures are necessary to minimize the frequency and severity of pipeline releases. The RP presents detailed guidance for developing a pipeline integrity management program. The program involves defining the critical locations along the pipeline and near pipeline facilities that would be most affected by an unintended release, defining the threats to the integrity of pipelines and pipeline facilities, calculating the risk of a release as it varies from one pipeline segment to another, prioritizing the segments for assessment by risk, assessing the segments for anomalies that could threaten integrity, and mitigating the risk by removing or repairing injurious defects. The program further involves the following:

1. calculating the remaining lives of anomalies that may remain in the system so that reassessment can be carried out to reevaluate the anomalies and remediate if necessary,

   
   

2. developing preventive and mitigative measures for integrity threats that cannot be effectively managed by periodic integrity assessment.

Nothing contained in any API publication is to be construed as granting any right, by implication or otherwise, for the manufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or product covered by letters patent. Neither should anything contained in the publication be construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringement of letters patent.

Shall: As used in a standard, “shall” denotes a minimum requirement in order to conform to the specification.

Should: As used in a standard, “should” denotes a recommendation or that which is advised but not required in order to conform to the specification.

This document was produced under API standardization procedures that ensure appropriate notification and participation in the developmental process and is designated as an API standard. Questions concerning the interpretation of the content of this publication or comments and questions concerning the procedures under which this publication was developed should be directed in writing to the Director of Standards, American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005. Requests for permission to reproduce or translate all or any part of the material published herein should also be addressed to the director.

Generally, API standards are reviewed and revised, reaffirmed, or withdrawn at least every five years. A one-time extension of up to two years may be added to this review cycle. Status of the publication can be ascertained from the API Standards Department, telephone (202) 682-8000. A catalog of API publications and materials is published annually by API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.

Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to the Standards Department, API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005, standards@api.org.

Contents

Page

1. Scope 1

2. Normative References 1

3. Terms, Definitions, Acronyms, and Abbreviations 2

   1. Terms and Definitions 2

   2. Acronyms and Abbreviations 9

4. Integrity Management Program 10

   1. General Considerations 10

   2. Elements of Integrity Management 10

5. Identifying Critical Locations with Respect to the Consequences of a Release 15

   1. General 15

   2. Determining Whether a Release from a Pipeline Segment or a Facility Could Affect a Critical

      Location 16

   3. Documentation and Updating 18

6. Gathering, Reviewing, and Integrating Data 18

   1. General Considerations 18

   2. Data Integration 19

   3. Data Maintenance 19

   4. Types of Data Used to Assess Risk 19

7. Risk Assessment Implementation 22

   1. General Considerations 22

   2. Developing a Risk Assessment Approach 23

   3. Characteristics of Risk Assessment Approaches 24

8. Integrity Assessment and Remediation 25

   1. General 25

   2. In-line Inspection (ILI) 27

   3. Responding to Anomalies Identified by ILIs 30

   4. Hydrostatic Pressure Testing 33

   5. Other Assessment Methods 37

   6. Seam Integrity Assessment 37

   7. Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) Assessment 40

   8. Repair Methods 41

9. Reassessment Frequencies 43

   1. General 43

   2. Anomaly Growth Rates 43

   3. Reassessment Intervals for Anomalies with Linear Growth Rates 45

   4. Reassessment Times for Cracks That Grow by Pressure-cycle-induced Fatigue 48

10. Preventive and Mitigative Measures to Assure Pipeline Integrity 48

    1. General 48

    2. Prevention of Third-party Damage 50

    3. Preventing Releases Associated with Hard Spots and Hard Heat-affected Zones in Line Pipe 53

    4. Preventing or Mitigating Releases Associated with Weather and Outside Force 53

       Contents

       Page

    5. Control of Corrosion 53

    6. Detecting and Minimizing the Consequences of Unintended Releases 54

    7. Reducing Pressure 56

11. Integrity Management of Pump Stations and Facility Piping 56

    1. General Considerations 56

    2. Tubing and Small-bore Piping 57

    3. Mitigating Internal and External Corrosion 58

    4. Preventing Freezing of Trapped Water 62

    5. Preventing Ethanol-related Cracking 62

    6. Visual Inspections and NDE 62

    7. Incident History 64

12. Program Evaluation 64

    1. General 64

    2. Performance Measures 64

    3. Performance Tracking and Trending 66

    4. Self-reviews 67

    5. Performance Improvement 68

13. Management of Change 68

Annex A (normative) Threats to Pipeline Integrity 71

Annex B (informative) In-line Inspection Technologies 79

Annex C (informative) Repair Strategies 83

Annex D (normative) Calculating Reassessment Intervals 87

Annex E (informative) Other Technologies 93

Annex F (informative) Leak Detection Methods 95

Bibliography 96

Figures

1. Schematic of Various Pipeline Pressures 3

2. Process Flow for an Integrity Management Program 11

3. Identifying Pipeline Segments or Facilities That Could Affect Critical Locations 17

4. Simplified Depiction of Risk 22

5. Timing for Scheduled Responses 46

6. Effects of Wall Thickness and Defect Growth Rate 47

1. Reassessment Intervals Based on a Specific Failure-pressure-vs-anomaly-size Model 87

2. Remaining Life of a Blunt Anomaly or a Cracklike Anomaly in a Material of Optimum Toughness 89

3. Remaining Life of a Cracklike Anomaly in a Material of Less-than-optimum Toughness 90

4. Remaining Life of a Cracklike Anomaly or Selective Seam Corrosion in a Material of

Much Less-than-optimum Toughness 91

Contents

Tables

Page

1. In-line Inspection Tools and Capabilities 28

2. Sample Test Failure Information 37

3. Acceptable Repair Methods 42

4. Corrosion Rates Related to Soil 44

5. Examples of Preventive Measures to Address Pipeline Integrity Threats 49

6. Examples of Mitigative Measures to Address Consequences 49

7. Leak Detection Methods 55

8. Organization of Topics Covered in Section 11 58

9. Examples of Performance Measurement by Threat 65

10. Performance Measures by Process Step 67

11. Examples of Management of Change 70

D.1 Benchmark Cycles to Determine Cycle Aggressiveness 91

Introduction

Purpose and Objectives

The goal of the operator of any pipeline is to operate the pipeline so that there are no adverse effects on public/ employees, the environment, or customers. The goal is error-free, spill-free, and incident-free operation of the pipeline.

An integrity management program provides a means to improve the safety of pipeline systems and to allocate operator resources effectively to

• identify and analyze actual and potential precursor events that can result in pipeline incidents;

  
  

• examine the likelihood and potential severity of pipeline incidents;

  
  

• provide a comprehensive and integrated means for examining and comparing the spectrum of risks and risk reduction activities available;

  
  

• provide a structured, easily communicated means for selecting and implementing risk reduction activities;

  
  

• establish and track system performance with the goal of improving that performance.

This recommended practice (RP) outlines a process that an operator of a pipeline system can use to assess risks and make decisions about risks in operating a hazardous liquid pipeline in order to achieve a number of goals, including reducing both the number and consequences of incidents. Section 4 describes the integrity management program that forms the basis of this RP. This program is illustrated schematically in Figure 2. This RP also supports the development of integrity management programs required under 49 CFR 195.452 of the U.S. federal pipeline safety regulations.

This RP is intended for use by individuals and teams charged with planning, implementing, and improving a pipeline integrity management program. A team could include engineers, operating personnel, and technicians or specialists with specific experience or expertise (corrosion, in-line inspection, right-of-way patrolling, etc.). Users of this RP should be familiar with applicable pipeline safety regulations (e.g. 49 CFR 195).

Guiding Principles

The development of this RP was based on certain guiding principles. These principles are reflected in many of the sections and are provided here to give the reader the sense of the need to view pipeline integrity from a broad perspective.

Integrity should be built into pipeline systems from initial planning, design, and construction. Integrity management of a pipeline starts with the sound design and construction of the pipeline. Guidance for new construction is provided in a number of consensus standards, including ASME B31.4, as well as the pipeline safety regulations. As these standards and guidelines are applied to the design of a pipeline, the designer should consider the area the pipeline traverses and the possible impacts that the pipeline may have on that area and the people that reside in its vicinity. New construction is not a subject of this RP, but the design specifications and as-built condition of the pipeline provide important baseline information for an integrity management program.

Effective integrity management is built on qualified people using defined processes to operate maintained facilities. The integrity of the physical facility is only part of the complete system that allows an operator to reduce both the number of incidents and the adverse effects of errors and incidents. The total system also includes the people that operate the facility and the work processes that the employees use and follow. A comprehensive integrity management program should address people, processes, and facilities.

An integrity management program should be flexible. An integrity management program should be customized to support each operator’s unique conditions. Furthermore, the program should be continually evaluated and modified to accommodate changes in the pipeline design and operation, changes in the environment in which the system operates, and new operating data and other integrity-related information. Continuous evaluation is required to be sure the program takes appropriate advantage of improved technology and that the program remains integrated with the operator’s business practices and effectively supports the operator's integrity goals.

Operators have multiple options available to address risks. Components of the facility or system can be changed; additional training can be provided to the people that operate the system; processes or procedures can be modified; or a combination of actions can be used to optimize risk reduction.

The integration of information is a key component for managing system integrity. A key element of the integrity management program is the integration of all relevant information in the decision-making process. Information that can impact an operator's understanding of the important risks to a pipeline system comes from a variety of sources. The operator is in the best position to gather and analyze this information. By integrating all of the relevant information, the operator can determine where the risks of an incident are relevant and are the greatest and make prudent decisions to reduce these risks.

Preparing for and conducting a risk assessment is a key element in managing pipeline system integrity. Risk assessment is an analytical process through which an operator determines the types of adverse events or conditions that might impact pipeline integrity, the likelihood that those events or conditions will lead to a loss of integrity, and the nature and severity of the consequences that might occur following a failure. This analytical process involves the integration and analysis of design, construction, operating, maintenance, testing, and other information about a pipeline system. Risk assessments can have varying scopes, varying levels of detail, and use different methods. However, the ultimate goal of assessing risks is to identify and prioritize the most significant risks so that an operator can make informed decisions about these issues.

Assessing risks to pipeline integrity is a continuous process. Analyzing for risks in a pipeline system is an iterative process. The operator will periodically gather additional and refreshed information and system operating experience. This information should be factored into the understanding of system risks. As the significance and relevance of this newer information to risk is understood, the operator may need to adjust its integrity plan accordingly. This may result in changes to inspection methods or frequency or additional modifications to the pipeline system in response to the data. As changes are made, different pipelines within a single operating company and different operators will be at different places with regard to the goal of incident-free operation. Each pipeline system and each company should implement specific goals and measures to monitor the improvements in integrity and to assess the need for additional changes.

Remedial actions are taken for injurious defects. Operators should take action to address integrity issues raised from assessments and information analysis. Operators should evaluate anomalies and identify those that are potentially injurious to pipeline integrity. Operators should take action to remediate or eliminate injurious defects.

New technology should be evaluated and utilized, as appropriate. New technology incorporated into integrity management programs should be understood. Such new technology can enhance an operator's ability to assess risks and the capability of analytical tools to assess the integrity of system components.

Operators should periodically assess the capabilities of new technologies and techniques that may provide improved understanding about the pipe's condition or provide new opportunities to reduce risk. Knowledge about what is available and effective will allow the operator to apply the most appropriate technologies or techniques to a specific risk to best address potential impacts.

Pipeline system integrity and integrity management programs should be evaluated on a continual basis. Operators are encouraged to perform internal reviews to ensure the effectiveness of the integrity management program in achieving the program's goals. Some operators may choose to use the services of third parties to assist with such evaluations.

Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines

1. Scope

   This recommended practice (RP) is applicable to pipeline systems used to transport “hazardous liquids” as defined in

   U.S. Title 49 CFR Part 195.2. The use of this RP is not limited to pipelines regulated under 49 CFR 195, and the principles embodied in integrity management are applicable to all pipeline systems.

   
   

   This RP is specifically designed to provide the operator with a description of industry-proven practices in pipeline integrity management. The guidance is largely targeted to the line pipe along the right-of-way, but the process and approach can be applied to pipeline facilities, including pipeline stations, terminals, and delivery facilities associated with pipeline systems. Certain sections of this RP provide guidance specific to pipeline stations, terminals, and delivery facilities.

   
   

2. Normative References

The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.

API Standard 5T1, Standard on Imperfection Terminology

API Standard 579-1/ASME FFS-1, Fitness-For-Service

API Standard 653, Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction

API Recommended Practice 1109, Marking Liquid Petroleum Pipeline Facilities

API Recommended Practice 1166, Excavation Monitoring and Observation

ASME B31G 1, Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines: A Supplement to ASME B31 Code for Pressure Piping

ASME B31.4-2009, Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids

ASME B31.8S-2004, Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines

ASTM E1049-85 2, Standard Practices for Cycle Counting in Fatigue Analysis

NACE SP0204 3, Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) Direct Assessment Methodology

NACE SP0169, Control of External Corrosion on Underground or Submerged Metallic Piping Systems NACE SP0208, Internal Corrosion Direct Assessment Methodology for Liquid Petroleum Pipelines NACE SP0502-2002, Pipeline External Corrosion Direct Assessment Methodology

1. ASME International, 3 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10016-5990, www.asme.org.

2. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA, 19428-2959, www.astm.org

3. NACE International (formerly the National Association of Corrosion Engineers), 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77218-8340, www.nace.org.

1