High Consequence Areas Pipeline Assessment Intervals Is there

High Consequence Areas & Pipeline Assessment Intervals –Is there a need for change? Terry Boss Sr. VP Environment Safety and Operations Interstate Natural Gas Association of America

Outline • • • Natural Gas and Transportation Management of Public Risk Results of the IMP Program Requesting Flexibility in IMP Program Schedule Ongoing Initiatives to Improve Performance

Natural Gas and Transportation • Primarily Methane – Hydrogen with some Carbon – Swamp Gas • • • Lower Density of Energy – Gaseous Locations of Supply is Diverse Locations of Market is Diverse Transportation by Pipelines is Most Feasible “Bridge” Fuel Primary Risk is Fire – Lighter than Air – Limited Ignition Range – Heat Radiation based on Quantity

Market and Population is Dispersed 4

The Natural Gas Industry Marketers Storage Commercial Residential Producers • Majors • Independents 272, 500 Gas Wells Industrial & Utilities Gathering Storage 30 Major Interstate Pipelines 1200 Distributors

Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines

More Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Information www. ingaa. org

Managing Public Risk Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Safety Development Individual Concept (1920 -) Company Practices (1927 -) Industry Guidelines (1932 -) Consensus Standards and Codes (1935 - State Regulations (1940 --) Federal Regulations (1968 -)

Pipeline Safety - Layers of Protection Example Regulations OPS 49 CFR 192/5 Codes ASME B 31. 4/8 NACE RP-0169 & RP-0502 API RP-1163 Close Internal Survey Direct Current Voltage Gradient Hydrotesting Inline Inspection Mfg Standards Practices Programs Const Integrity Management Internal SCC Research & Development External Corrosion Threat

Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Risk Management biased by Population Density • Design – Design Classes • Materials – Strength of Pipe • Construction – Construction Techniques • Operation – Operating pressures and Practices • Inspection – Frequency and Type of Inspection • Maintenance

Example “High Consequence Area” 11

Worst Case Consequence Analysis

Constant Consequence Concept Pipeline diameter “d” (inches) = 36” Pipeline diameter “d” (inches) = 18” MAOP 1650 psig: PIR = 1000 ft MAOP 600 psig: PIR = 304 ft Pipeline diameter “d” (inches) = 30” MAOP 1000 psig: PIR = 655 ft 660 ft. r = 1009 ft. 660 ft. PIR = 0. 69 pd 2 20 houses within circle

Pictorial of a High Consequence Area for Natural Gas Overlaid on the Class Location System Class 3 30” Pipeline 1010 psig Houses 660 ft HCA 14

Results of the IMP Program (PHMSA) Carlsbad Number of Significant Incidents Number of Fatalities Number of Injuries Property Damage Hurricanes

Ongoing Performance Metrics -PHMSA

INGAA Foundation Report

Probability of Failure

Types Failures § Static Anomalies § Detrimental § Non - Detrimental § Time Independent Defects § Excavation Damage § Weather § Terrorist § Time Dependent Defects § Corrosion § Cracking

Manage Time Dependent Defects § Manage Time Dependent Effects § § Inline Inspection Pressure Test Direct Assessment Other Approved Methods

Integrity Assessment Technology Split

GAO Report (Sept 2006)

Timeline For IMP

Interaction of Baseline and Continuing Assessments

Condition of gas transmission pipelines are better than original public perception

GAO concludes that 7 year reassessment period is conservative

Requesting Flexibility in IMP Program Schedule

Public Workshop to gather comments on Special Permit and Criteria Discussion for 7 year Reassessments Location: Arlington, Virginia Jan 18, 2008

Congressional Testimony - March 2008

Number of Reportable Incidents

Number of Immediate Repairs

Number of Scheduled Repairs

Ongoing Initiatives to Improve Performance • • Tools Processes Procedures Implementation

Cased Pipeline Integrity Assessment Workshop

Anomaly Assessment and Repair Workshop - October 22, 2008

Conclusions • Natural Gas is a Very Important Energy Source – Flexible and Readily Available – Bridge Fuel for Climate Change – Energy Security • Public Risk Can and Is Being Managed • Flexibility in the IMP Program is Very Desirable • Commitment to Ongoing Improvement

Background Material • • COMPARISON OF INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES FOR NATURAL GAS TRANSMISSION PIPELINES – www. ingaa. org – F-2007 -09 NATURAL GAS PIPELINE SAFETY Risk-Based Standards Should Allow Operators to Better Tailor Reassessments to Pipeline Threats – www. gao. gov – GAO-06 -945 Integrity Management Plan Metrics http: //primis. phmsa. dot. gov/gasimp/Performance. Measures. htm PHMSA Workshops – – – • Public Workshop to gather comments on Special Permit and Criteria Discussion for 7 -year Reassessments http: //www. phmsa. dot. gov/portal/site/PHMSA/menuitem. ebdc 7 a 8 a 7 e 39 f 2 e 55 cf 2031050248 a 0 c/? vgnextoi d=4 aeb 8 defc 8 de 6110 Vgn. VCM 1000001 ecb 7898 RCRD&vgnextchannel=5296519 d 7 e 818110 Vgn. VCM 1000009 ed 07898 RCRD&vgnextfmt=print Cased Pipeline Integrity Assessment Workshop https: //primis. phmsa. dot. gov/meetings/Mtg. Home. mtg? mtg=54 Anomaly Assessment and Repair Workshop https: //primis. phmsa. dot. gov/meetings/Mtg. Home. mtg? mtg=55 Congressional Hearing – The Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006: Implementation Review and Discussion of Safety Reassessment Intervals for Natural Gas Pipelines; Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality Wednesday, March 12, 2008 http: //energycommerce. house. gov/cmte_mtgs/110 -eaqhrg. 031208. PIPE. shtml