Performance Reporting

1
Performance Reporting Presentation at the
Pipeline Safety Trusts Restoring Trust in
Pipeline Safety Conference November 3,
2006 Lois N. Epstein, P.E. Senior Engineer

2
Cook Inlet Watershed Background

• Includes Anchorage
• 39,000 sq. miles land (92 public) 8,000 sq.
  miles marine size of Pennsylvania
• 16 offshore platforms, numerous wells onshore
  oil/gas fields gt 1000 miles of oil and gas
  pipelines approximately 300 miles are oil
  pipelines tankers, LNG export plant, refinery,
  tank farms, fertilizer plant
• 7 national parks and wildlife refuges 4 state
  parks
• Subsistence users
• Beluga whales (depleted species), salmon, bears

3
Performance Reporting Why is it Valuable?

• Ensures accountability
• What gets measured, gets done
• Provides an incentive for continuous improvement
  (trends are important) and allows for comparative
  analyses among operators
• Increases public confidence
• The lack of pipeline operating permits means
  there are few opportunities for public dialogue

4
Examples of Performance Measures

• Number of releases per 1,000 pipeline miles
• Amount released per 1,000 pipeline miles
• Average or median release size
• Injuries or fatalities per 1,000 pipeline miles
• of releases from a particular cause, e.g.,
  corrosion (external or internal)

5
Cook Inlet Oil Pipeline Release Causes
Release Frequency 66/60 months 1.1 x/ month 9/12 months 0.75 x/ month 12/24 months 0.5 x/ month
Onshore / Offshore 88 / 12 100 / 0 83 / 17
Cause Corrosion Unknown/unreported Human error/maintenance-related Pipeline infrastructure failure Abandoned pipeline release Frozen pipeline Third-party damage 27 26 20 14 8 5 2 0 33 22 22 11 22 0 8 0 8 42 25 17 0
6
BPs March Spill in Alaska What Can WeLearn
from BPs Performance Report to PHMSA?
Over 200,000 gallons spilled biggest spill ever
on Alaskas North Slope (March 2006)
7
BPs March Spill in Alaska What Can WeLearn
from BPs Performance Report to PHMSA?

• POSITIVES
• Annual report provides basic pipeline
  information aggregate mileage, decade(s)
  installed, operating pressure(s), volume
  transported
• Provides general integrity inspection
  information, e.g., mileage tested, of
  anomalies, of repairs

• NEGATIVES
• Annual report does not distinguish information by
  state or by regulated and unregulated pipeline
  mileage
• Does not identify inspection, repair, etc. data
  by pipeline segment
• No information on mileage that could affect
  High Consequence Areas
• Operators criteria for performing repairs are
  not stated

8
Recommendations for Improved Performance Reporting

• Need release and mileage data at a minimum
  for currently unregulated lines
• Operators should report pipeline data by state
  and segment
• The public needs High Consequence Area maps and
  data on pipeline mileage that could affect HCAs
• Need public reporting of operators criteria for
  repairs these decisions need to be consistent