在役管道的有效风险管理:通过压力管理和板保护实现ALARP

Francis Carroll, J. Hayes
{"title":"在役管道的有效风险管理:通过压力管理和板保护实现ALARP","authors":"Francis Carroll, J. Hayes","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Australia (and the UK), pipeline operating companies have a regulatory obligation to ensure that their assets are designed, constructed, operated and maintained so that risk to people and the environment is as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). In many routine cases, demonstration that risk is ALARP is a matter of compliance with relevant technical standards. There are some cases, however, that are more complex.\n If a pipeline has been subject to significant urban encroachment and does not conform to current design standards for this service, how does a pipeline operator decide whether risk controls are sufficient? In Australia, rather than either ‘grandfathering’ requirements or mandating retrospective compliance with new standards, operators are required to ensure pipelines are safe and that risk levels are acceptable. The answer in cases such as this is a matter of judgment and we have legal, moral and reputational responsibilities to get decisions such as this right. There is currently no formal requirement in the US for pipeline risks to be ALARP, although the concept is gradually being introduced to US industry safety law. Examples include US offshore well control rules, California refinery safety regulations and the nuclear sector concept of ‘as low as reasonably achievable’.\n In this paper, we demonstrate application of the ALARP process to a case study pipeline built in the 1960s that has been heavily encroached by urban development. The Australian risk-based approach required formal ALARP assessment including consideration of options to reduce pressure, relocate or replace the pipeline, or increase the level of physical or procedural protection.\n Current and predicted operating conditions on this existing pipeline allowed reduction in operating pressure in some of the encroached segments, sufficient to achieve the equivalent of current Australian requirements for ‘No Rupture’ in high consequence areas for new pipelines. In other areas this was not achievable and a lesser degree of pressure reduction was instigated, in combination with physical barrier protection. The physical barrier slabbing comprised over 7 km of 20 mm thick high-density polyethylene (HDPE) slabs, buried above the pipeline. This approach was new in Australia and required field trials to confirm effectiveness against tiger tooth excavators and rotary augers.\n These upgrades to the case study pipeline have significantly decreased the risk of pipeline failure, by reducing both likelihood and consequences of accidental impact. In combination with rigorous procedural controls such as patrol surveillance and community liaison, real risk reduction has been achieved and ALARP has been demonstrated.","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":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effective Risk Management for In Service Pipelines: Achieving ALARP by Pressure Management and Slab Protection\",\"authors\":\"Francis Carroll, J. Hayes\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/IPC2018-78170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Australia (and the UK), pipeline operating companies have a regulatory obligation to ensure that their assets are designed, constructed, operated and maintained so that risk to people and the environment is as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). In many routine cases, demonstration that risk is ALARP is a matter of compliance with relevant technical standards. There are some cases, however, that are more complex.\\n If a pipeline has been subject to significant urban encroachment and does not conform to current design standards for this service, how does a pipeline operator decide whether risk controls are sufficient? In Australia, rather than either ‘grandfathering’ requirements or mandating retrospective compliance with new standards, operators are required to ensure pipelines are safe and that risk levels are acceptable. The answer in cases such as this is a matter of judgment and we have legal, moral and reputational responsibilities to get decisions such as this right. There is currently no formal requirement in the US for pipeline risks to be ALARP, although the concept is gradually being introduced to US industry safety law. Examples include US offshore well control rules, California refinery safety regulations and the nuclear sector concept of ‘as low as reasonably achievable’.\\n In this paper, we demonstrate application of the ALARP process to a case study pipeline built in the 1960s that has been heavily encroached by urban development. The Australian risk-based approach required formal ALARP assessment including consideration of options to reduce pressure, relocate or replace the pipeline, or increase the level of physical or procedural protection.\\n Current and predicted operating conditions on this existing pipeline allowed reduction in operating pressure in some of the encroached segments, sufficient to achieve the equivalent of current Australian requirements for ‘No Rupture’ in high consequence areas for new pipelines. In other areas this was not achievable and a lesser degree of pressure reduction was instigated, in combination with physical barrier protection. The physical barrier slabbing comprised over 7 km of 20 mm thick high-density polyethylene (HDPE) slabs, buried above the pipeline. This approach was new in Australia and required field trials to confirm effectiveness against tiger tooth excavators and rotary augers.\\n These upgrades to the case study pipeline have significantly decreased the risk of pipeline failure, by reducing both likelihood and consequences of accidental impact. In combination with rigorous procedural controls such as patrol surveillance and community liaison, real risk reduction has been achieved and ALARP has been demonstrated.\",\"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\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78170\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 2: Pipeline Safety Management Systems; Project Management, Design, Construction, and Environmental Issues; Strain Based Design; Risk and Reliability; Northern Offshore and Production Pipelines","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在澳大利亚(和英国),管道运营公司有监管义务确保其资产的设计、建造、运营和维护,使对人类和环境的风险尽可能低(ALARP)。在许多常规情况下,证明风险是ALARP是遵守有关技术标准的问题。然而,有些情况要复杂得多。如果管道受到严重的城市侵蚀,并且不符合该服务的现行设计标准,管道运营商如何确定风险控制是否足够?在澳大利亚,不是“祖父性”要求或强制遵守新标准,而是要求运营商确保管道是安全的,风险水平是可接受的。在这种情况下,答案是一个判断问题,我们有法律、道德和声誉上的责任来做出这样的决定。目前,美国没有正式要求管道风险为ALARP,尽管这一概念正逐渐被引入美国工业安全法。例如,美国海上油井控制规则、加州炼油厂安全法规以及核电行业“尽可能低”的概念。在本文中,我们将ALARP过程应用于一个案例研究管道,该管道建于20世纪60年代,已被城市发展严重侵占。澳大利亚基于风险的方法需要进行正式的ALARP评估,包括考虑减少压力、重新安置或更换管道或提高物理或程序保护水平的选择。现有管道的当前和预测的运行条件允许在一些被侵占的部分降低操作压力,足以达到澳大利亚目前对新管道高影响区域的“无破裂”要求。在其他地区,这是无法实现的,因此采用了较小程度的减压,并结合物理屏障保护。物理屏障板由超过7公里的20毫米厚的高密度聚乙烯(HDPE)板组成,埋在管道上方。这种方法在澳大利亚是一种新方法,需要进行现场试验,以确认对抗虎牙挖掘机和旋转螺旋钻的有效性。这些对案例研究管道的升级通过降低意外影响的可能性和后果,显著降低了管道故障的风险。结合巡逻监视和社区联络等严格的程序控制,真正减少了风险,并证明了警报和警报方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effective Risk Management for In Service Pipelines: Achieving ALARP by Pressure Management and Slab Protection
In Australia (and the UK), pipeline operating companies have a regulatory obligation to ensure that their assets are designed, constructed, operated and maintained so that risk to people and the environment is as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). In many routine cases, demonstration that risk is ALARP is a matter of compliance with relevant technical standards. There are some cases, however, that are more complex. If a pipeline has been subject to significant urban encroachment and does not conform to current design standards for this service, how does a pipeline operator decide whether risk controls are sufficient? In Australia, rather than either ‘grandfathering’ requirements or mandating retrospective compliance with new standards, operators are required to ensure pipelines are safe and that risk levels are acceptable. The answer in cases such as this is a matter of judgment and we have legal, moral and reputational responsibilities to get decisions such as this right. There is currently no formal requirement in the US for pipeline risks to be ALARP, although the concept is gradually being introduced to US industry safety law. Examples include US offshore well control rules, California refinery safety regulations and the nuclear sector concept of ‘as low as reasonably achievable’. In this paper, we demonstrate application of the ALARP process to a case study pipeline built in the 1960s that has been heavily encroached by urban development. The Australian risk-based approach required formal ALARP assessment including consideration of options to reduce pressure, relocate or replace the pipeline, or increase the level of physical or procedural protection. Current and predicted operating conditions on this existing pipeline allowed reduction in operating pressure in some of the encroached segments, sufficient to achieve the equivalent of current Australian requirements for ‘No Rupture’ in high consequence areas for new pipelines. In other areas this was not achievable and a lesser degree of pressure reduction was instigated, in combination with physical barrier protection. The physical barrier slabbing comprised over 7 km of 20 mm thick high-density polyethylene (HDPE) slabs, buried above the pipeline. This approach was new in Australia and required field trials to confirm effectiveness against tiger tooth excavators and rotary augers. These upgrades to the case study pipeline have significantly decreased the risk of pipeline failure, by reducing both likelihood and consequences of accidental impact. In combination with rigorous procedural controls such as patrol surveillance and community liaison, real risk reduction has been achieved and ALARP has been demonstrated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信