Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines最新文献

{"title":"The Application of a Knowledge Transfer Taxonomy to Pipeline Construction Inspection Best Practices","authors":"Ritch Rappel, Julia Dorscht, R. Sahney","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78523","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78523","url":null,"abstract":"The pipeline sector is facing a multi-faceted challenge regarding its workforce. Valuable knowledge is being lost as increasing numbers of technical experts and long-term employees exit the industry (due to retirement). Concurrently, the public spotlight is focused on the environmental impact of the pipeline industry. Therefore, robust construction of new pipelines and effective maintenance of aging infrastructure is increasingly important. Herein lies the challenge — How does the industry transfer the knowledge required to ensure that personnel have suitable competency to maintain the integrity of the pipeline system? A scenario where new personnel efficiently gain knowledge through experience is critical.\u0000 An important aspect of achieving this is a more systematic and thoughtful approach to knowledge transfer. As part of its fundamental methodology for developing training and alternate methods for knowledge transfer, the team launched an initiative to review the literature and current industry approaches. This was done as a key input to developing a “Knowledge Taxonomy.” This tool simplifies the process for selecting the optimal method for effectively transferring key technical knowledge based on the desired level of competency (e.g., awareness building vs. mastery).\u0000 Specifically, the team identified a number of consistent themes and combined them with both sound educational theory and industry experience to develop a tool in the form of a practical framework. This Knowledge Transfer Taxonomy was then applied to a specific knowledge gap in industry as a case study. This paper will\u0000 1. Summarize, at a high level, the results of the literature review and current approaches;\u0000 2. Describe the framework (i.e., Knowledge Taxonomy) developed by the team;\u0000 3. Discuss a case study involving the application of this framework to a specific and real challenge; and\u0000 Through this work, the team identified and developed specific strategies and tactics to effectively overcome some of the barriers to knowledge transfer. These experiences will be shared in the context of a specific situation that typifies the current challenges industry is facing in effective knowledge transfer.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129974988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Updates on Pipeline Integrity Reliability Targets","authors":"Alex Nemeth, S. Hassanien, Len Leblanc","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78378","url":null,"abstract":"The use of integrity reliability science is becoming a prevalent element in the pipeline integrity management process. One of the key elements in this process is defining what integrity reliability targets to achieve in order to maintain the safety of the system. IPC2016-64425 presented different industry approaches around the area of defining reliability target levels for pipelines. It discussed the importance of setting operators’ specific integrity target reliability levels, how to choose such targets, and how to determine the safety of a pipeline asset by comparing the probability of failure (PoF) against an integrity permissible probability of failure (PoFp) while keeping an eye on the estimated expected number of failures. Building upon the previous discussion, this paper reviews a risk-based approach for estimating integrity reliability targets that account for the consequence of a potential release. Given available technical publications, the as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) concept, and operators’ specific risk tolerances, there is room for improving the communication of integrity reliability along with selected targets. The paper describes how codes, standards, and operators set reliability targets, how operator specific targets can be chosen, and how industry currently recommends liquid pipelines reliability targets. Moreover, the paper proposes different approaches to define practical reliability targets coupled with an integrity risk-informed decision making framework.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134613797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Asset Integrity Management System Audits for the National Gas Company of Trinidad and Tobago","authors":"M. Brongers, Steven J. Weichel, Rafer Mohammed, A. Kissoon","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78632","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78632","url":null,"abstract":"In 2015 and 2017, Asset Integrity Management (AIM) System Audits were performed of a natural gas transmission and distribution company. The AIM systems were evaluated as part of a National Facilities Audit (NFA) for the Trinidad and Tobago T&T) Ministry of Energy and Energy Industries (MEEI) and for the company directly. To allow comparison of the company-sponsored audit with the NFA performed for the MEEI, the audit protocol and methodology used the same scoring system and benchmarking in both cases. This paper presents the results, divided as Notable Mentions and Opportunities for Improvement for the company. The findings are discussed in the context of the national oil & gas industry in Trinidad and Tobago, and the long-term vision and efforts of the company to improve its AIM performance.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"242 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121328816","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Operational Change Assessments: A Proactive Approach to Managing Pipeline Integrity","authors":"Kelsey Fernuik, Sean Keane, S. Akonko, Omer Jomha, W. Limming","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78585","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78585","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents a safety case program approach used by Enbridge to assess proposed operational changes. This approach identifies the impact to threats, barriers, and consequences associated with a proposed change, and ensure the safety of the system is not compromised by following a plan-do-check-act methodology.\u0000 Enbridge integrity management uses a plan-do-check-act system. A key aspect of this is the integrity plan which is developed for each asset to balance integrity requirements (fitness for service) with business drivers (risk and asset plan). Completion of a safety case provides an independent check for each pipeline segment within the system, ensuring identified risks are managed to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). Additional mitigation actions are identified and implemented in the event that ALARP is not met.\u0000 Operational parameters are a key consideration in the development of the integrity plan and include variables such as flow rate, injection and delivery locations, service, maximum allowable operating pressures, temperature and pressure cycling. The safety case program acts as a check by considering the threats associated with the proposed change to operational parameters, and then identifies whether or not the current pipeline integrity barriers for that asset are sufficient for the proposed operation, and if ALARP is still achieved based on the safety case program assessment. Where current barriers are not sufficient, actions are identified and put into place as required. The program also considers alignment to set demonstrated program performance targets, including reliability targets such as probability of failure, and deterministic targets which are used to confirm the safety case status.\u0000 This paper details the operational change assessment process within the safety case program, and discusses the benefits where the process was used.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116339326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How Dry Is Dry?","authors":"C. Hartloper, K. Botros, V. Liu, G. Lalonde, J. Lu, Y. Saud de Puche","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78580","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78580","url":null,"abstract":"Air drying is used after dewatering to dry a pipeline or piping facility before commissioning it with natural gas. This process typically involves blowing dehydrated air through the pipe sections until they are determined to be suitably dry. The question addressed in this paper is: how dry is dry? A common metric used to judge the pipe section’s dryness is the drying air’s outlet water dew point. Typically, air drying continues until a suitably dry low water dew point, such as −40°C, is measured at the outlet of the pipeline or facility. However, there is currently a lack of understanding of how this final outlet water dew point relates to the remaining water and thus the subsequent start up of the pipeline or facility. If the outlet water dew point is higher than required, issues may arise upon start up; e.g., hydrates could form along the pipeline or at downstream facilities. Conversely, if the outlet water dew point is lower than required, unnecessary time would have been spent in drying, and hence higher cost.\u0000 This paper advocates an approach to determine when air drying is complete that considers the start-up phase. The approach consists of two parts. In the first part, the air drying parameters (drying air flow rate, inlet water dew point, etc.) and the final outlet water dew point are used to quantify the volume and surface area of water remaining after the drying process is completed. In the second part, the evaporation of this water into the gas flowing through the pipeline/facility after commissioning and start up is modeled as a function of the gas flow rate, temperature, pressure and inlet water content. Then, the water content of the gas at the delivery points is calculated. This increase can then be evaluated in reference to the water content specifications at the delivery points. The approach is exemplified by a 31 km NPS 48 pipeline over a mountainous terrain.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"450 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115729438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Accelerating Industry Performance Through Collaborative Continual Improvement","authors":"C. Lukaniuk, C. Coupal","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78285","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78285","url":null,"abstract":"CEPA Integrity First® (Integrity First), led by the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association (CEPA) and a condition of membership, acts as a foundation for continual improvement, bringing our members together to share and implement leading practices in the areas of safety, environment and socio-economics. Integrity First includes three principles and ten priority areas (such as emergency management, pipeline integrity and water protection) where members collaborate, share leading practices and hold each other accountable.\u0000 Integrity First is a management systems approach designed by CEPA members for industry to achieve collaborative continual improvement. It supports the collective setting of priorities, plans, assessments and improvements.\u0000 While spreadsheets enabled the first rounds of assessments, CEPA required a solution that engaged multiple stakeholders over a complex timeline, coordinated activities clearly and precisely, while keeping the process transparent and efficient. The information generated is sensitive, so it must be kept secure while still being available for aggregation, reporting and reference. It needed to house communication tools so members could easily pull information and lastly, it needed to be easy to use.\u0000 In August of 2015, CEPA established a partnership with SPAN Consulting (SPAN) to address these challenges through its software as a service (SaaS) offering called Octane™.\u0000 This paper will review how CEPA designed and implemented a technical, web-based solution to enable an efficient, effective and transparent Integrity First with transformative impact. Specifically, through the use of this technology, there are now stronger communities of practice across industry with increased focus and effort on the opportunities to improve through real-time self-serve access to industry’s overall benchmarked performance, leadership and leading practices. CEPA’s commitment to enabling Integrity First is resulting in better adoption and improved performance.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114448975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Corrosion Growth Modeling Based on Mass In-Line Inspection Data Using Variational Inference","authors":"M. Birkland, M. Dann","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78081","url":null,"abstract":"In-line inspection (ILI) data is commonly used in corrosion growth models (CGMs) to predict the corrosion growth in energy pipelines. A hierarchical stochastic corrosion growth model is considered in this paper which considers the variations in the corrosion growth, both spatially and temporally, the inherent measurement error of the ILI tools as well as the model uncertainties. These uncertainties are represented as unknown model variables and are often inferred using a Bayesian method [1], [2] and samples of the unknown parameters’ posterior probability density functions (PDFs) are obtained using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling techniques [3].\u0000 ILIs can result in massive data sets. In order for MCMC-based inference techniques to yield reasonably accurate results, many samples (approaching infinity) are required. This fact in addition to the massive data sets exponentially increases the scale of the inference problem from an attainable solution to a potentially impossible one that is limited by today’s computing power. For this reason, MCMC-based inference techniques can become inefficient in the cases where ILI datasets are large. The objective is to propose variational inference (VI) as an alternative to MCMC to determine a Bayesian solution for the unknown parameters in complex stochastic CGMs. VI produces approximations of the posterior PDFs by treating the inference as an optimization problem. Variational inference emerged from machine learning for Bayesian inference of large data sets; therefore, it is an appropriate tool to use in the analysis of mass pipeline inspection data[4]–[7].\u0000 This paper introduces VI to solve the inference problem and provide a solution for a hierarchical stochastic CGM to describe the defect-specific corrosion growth experienced in pipelines based on excessively large ILI datasets. To gauge the accuracy of the VI implementation in the model, the results are compared to a set of values generated using a stochastic gamma process that represents the corrosion growth process experienced by the pipe.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130043539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Integrity Risk-Informed Decision Making","authors":"S. Hassanien, Doug Langer, Mona Abdolrazaghi","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78149","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last three decades, safety-critical industries (e.g. Nuclear, Aviation) have witnessed an evolution from risk-based to risk-informed safety management approaches, in which quantitative risk assessment is only one component of the decision making process. While the oil and gas pipeline industry has recently made several advancements towards safety management processes, their safety performance may still be seen to fall below the expected level achieved by other safety-critical industries. The intent of this paper is to focus on the safety decision making process within pipeline integrity management systems. Pipeline integrity rules, routines, and procedures are commonly based on regulatory requirements, industry best practices, and engineering experience; where they form “programmed” decisions. Non-programmed safety and business decisions are unique and “usually” unstructured, where solutions are worked out as problems arise. Non-programmed decision making requires more activities towards defining decision alternatives and mutual adjustment by stakeholders in order to reach an optimal decision. Theoretically, operators are expected to be at a maturity level where programmed decisions are ready for most, if not all, of their operational problems. However, such expectations might only cover certain types of threats and integrity situations. Herein, a formal framework for non-programmed integrity decisions is introduced. Two common decision making frameworks; namely, risk-based and risk-informed are briefly discussed. In addition, the paper reviews the recent advances in nuclear industry in terms of decision making, introduces a combined technical and management decision making process called integrity risk-informed decision making (IRIDM), and presents a guideline for making integrity decisions.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"42 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132869206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessment of the Threat From Wildfires on Above Ground Natural Gas Facilities","authors":"C. Robinson, Zo Wattis, C. Dooley, Sladjana Popovic","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78059","url":null,"abstract":"In the light of recent experience of wildfires in Alberta and British Columbia, Alliance Pipeline has strengthened their emergency preparedness in dealing with external fire events that have the potential to affect above-ground facilities connected with their high pressure natural gas pipeline system. As part of this initiative a quantitative methodology has been developed that enables the effects of a wildfire on an above-ground pipeline facility to be assessed.\u0000 The methodology consists of three linked calculations which assess:\u0000 1. the severity of the wildfire, based on information from the Canadian Wildland Fire Information System,\u0000 2. the transmission of thermal radiation from the wildfire to the facility, and,\u0000 3. the response of equipment, structures and buildings to the incident thermal radiation.\u0000 The predictions of the methodology agree well with the actual damage observed at a lateral block valve site following a wildfire in 2016. Application to example facility types (block valve sites, meter stations and compressor stations) has demonstrated that, in general, damage is only predicted for more vulnerable items such as cables.\u0000 The sensitivity of the predictions of the methodology to the input parameters and key modelling uncertainties has been examined. This demonstrates that the results are sensitive to the distance of the facility from the tree line and the assumed vegetation type. This shows the importance of verifying the location relative to the vegetation and selecting the appropriate vegetation type from the Canadian Wildland Fire Information System for site specific assessments. The predictions of the methodology are particularly sensitive to the assumed flame temperature. However, a value has been chosen that gives good agreement with measured thermal radiation values from wildfires.\u0000 Of the mitigation options considered, the most effective and practical is to increase the distance to the tree line. This measure has the advantage of reducing radiation levels for all items on the site. Even though the work shows that failure of exposed pipework due to wildfires is unlikely, maintaining the flow within pipes is recommended as this increases the radiative flux at which failure is predicted to occur. However, as failure of cables and hence control systems would occur at a lower flux levels the fail-safe actions of such systems needs to be confirmed. Shielding of cables or items of equipment in general is likely to be impractical but could be considered for particularly vulnerable equipment or locations.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116686269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evolving Standards of Indigenous Peoples Engagement and Managing Project Risk","authors":"Bruce Vincent, I. Maharaj","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78319","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78319","url":null,"abstract":"The standards for Indigenous engagement are evolving rapidly in Canada. The risks to project approvals and schedules, based on whether consultation has been complete, have been recently demonstrated by the denial of project permits and protests against projects. Indigenous rights and the duty to consult with affected Indigenous groups is based on the Constitution Act, 1982 and has been, and is being, better defined through case law. At the same time, international standards, including the International Finance Corporation Performance Standards and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, are influencing government and corporate policies regarding consultation. The Government of Canada is revising policies and project application review processes, to incorporate the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada; that Commission specifically called for industry to take an active role in reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous peoples. Pipeline companies can manage cost, schedule and regulatory risks to their projects and enhance project and corporate social acceptance through building and maintaining respectful relationships and creating opportunities for Indigenous participation in projects.","PeriodicalId":164582,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","volume":"51 6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115552946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}