Leak Detection Program Management

(RP 1175)
April 24-26, 2018 | St. Louis, Missouri
Agenda
▪ Introduction

▪ Part 1 - Presentation from Chris Hoidal (PHMSA)

Audience Q/A (~5 minutes)

▪ Part 2 - Presentation from Christine Frazier-Hollins (Chevron)

Presentation from Marieli Romero (TransCanada)

▪ Part 3 - Audience Q/A (~15 minutes)

▪ Conclusion
Gap Assessment Industry Results
Performance Targets, Metrics, and KPIs (Chapter 7)
▪ Relationship of the terms
o Metrics - defines the overarching qualities desired from the leak
detection system (LDS)
o KPIs - specific measure(s) of the metric
o Performance Targets - Values used to measure KPIs that determine
if the metric goals are being achieved

▪ Example (tying it together)

Metric KPI Performance Target
Accuracy Leak Location +/- 5 miles
LD System(s) KPIs vs LD Program KPIs

Leak Detection Program Chapter 13

KPIs - PTs KPIs

Pipeline #1 Pipeline #2 Pipeline #n

(or Pipeline Segment) (or Pipeline Segment) (or Pipeline Segment)
Primary LDS(s) #1 Primary LDS(s) #2 Primary LDS(s) #n Chapter 7
(Metrics-KPIs-PTs) (Metrics-KPIs-PTs) (Metrics-KPIs-PTs)
(if applicable) (if applicable)
... (if applicable)
KPIs
Complementary Complementary Complementary
LDS(s) #1 LDS(s) #2 LDS(s) #n
(Metrics-KPIs-PTs) (Metrics-KPIs-PTs) (Metrics-KPIs-PTs)
 Update on Leak Detection
Regulations, 1175 Metrics and
Enforcement
2018 API Pipeline Conference
April 25, 2018

By
Christopher Hoidal
PHMSA Senior Technical Adviser
 PHMSA Final Rule
OQ Rule Issued 1/23/17 – Control Room Staff Training
- § 195.446/192.631 Control room management

– team training for both controllers and others who

would reasonably be expected to interact with
controllers (control room personnel) during
normal, abnormal or emergency situations
– roles, responsibilities, qualifications of others who
have the authority to direct or supersede technical
7
actions of the controller
 Regulatory Developments
• Hazardous liquid final rule posted January 2017
was pulled back
– Version posted included the Expanded Use of
Leak Detection System for Non HCA areas
– Did not include specific performance metrics

• Considering an NRPM to address rupture

detection, spill/release mitigation, and valve
placement to reduce spill volume
8 – It would have some performance metrics
 Continue Use of Standards
• API RP 1175 (Leak Detection Program Management)

• API RP 1168 (Control Room Management)

• API RP 1130 (Computational Pipeline Monitoring)

• API TR 1149 (Pipeline Variable Uncertainties and

Their Effects on Leak Detectability)

• External Sensors - External sensing is touched on in

1130 & 1175
9
 Areas for Improvement
“Front End”
• Use API 1175 to guide further LD improvement
through Pipeline System and Management
Changes (Use Metrics)
– More Accurate & Repeatable Instrumentation
– Add Instrumentation – Meters, Pressure,
External, etc.
– More “lock ups” to verify pressure holds
– Adjust operating parameters for more settled
1 flow regimes - Continue to enhance modeling
0
 PHMSA Opinion on 1175 Metrics
Keep Metrics for both Individual P/L System and
Program KPIs separated

• System KPIs should focus on Reliability, Accuracy,

Sensitivity, and Robustness

• Robustness strategy is lacking with respect to lack of

pressure sensors in hilly terrain and both sides of
valves, valve vaults external leak detection, ground
patrols in hard to fly areas.

• All about complementary coverage for different

operating leak detection profiles!
1
1
 PHMSA Opinion on 1175 Metrics
Segregate System and Program KPIS & Metrics
• Program KPIs and Metrics should focus on Level 3/4 or
Leading Indicators on system
– Non leak alarms (cause identified?), Abnormal Operations,
and loss of communication.
– Conduct Lock up tests or find static leaks – Non steady state
conditions.
– Percentage of Pipeline covered, e.g. external, sensors in low
lying areas – Where are you blind?
• Program KPIs and Metrics– Level 4
– Are centralized Control Rooms providing better training,
leak recognition, and response? How many MOCs are they
dealing with each year? Are alarm setting reviewed
annually?
1
2
 Enforcement Strategy
• Validate – Does the leak detection system
meet the unique characteristics of the pipeline,
e.g. are there sufficient sensors in hilly areas
to monitor the line during an idle state.
“Adequacy Easily Determined after Spill”
– Note: we frequently use Industry Standards
for guidance even if not IBR

• Verification – Does the LDS comply with

1
minimum Federal requirements.
3
 Questions?

14
Chevron Pipe Line KPI Overview:
Leak Detection Systems & Program
April 24-26, 2018 | St. Louis, Missouri
Chevron Pipe Line
Journey
• Moving from “I Think” to “I “I Know”
Know”
• Tiered approach – building on
existing systems and Stakeholder Value
interactions with stakeholders to • Management &
align and form a comprehensive Support, Maintain, Leak Detection
Improve Program (LDP)
Pipeline Leak Detection
Management System • Subject Matter
Recognition & Experts (SME) &
Response Leak Detection
• Controllers & Systems
Leak Detection
Systems (LDS)

“I Think”
KPI for Recognition & Response
▪ Type: Program Level - Reliability & Sensitivity
▪ Audience: ALL
▪ Leak Detection Systems Included:
– Physical Inspection
– Manual Observations
– Computational Pipeline Monitoring (CPM)
▪ What is being tracked:
– Controller response to Leaks and Incidents (inclusive of False
Positives)
– Quantifies controller response through evaluation of time started,
time found, and time ideal
– Self-reported by controllers
– Evaluation/quantification via an impartial cross functional team

Measure of institutionalization of leak detection in our culture

KPIs for SMEs: Support, Maintain, & Improve
▪ Types: System Level for CPM Robustness, Reliability & Sensitivity
▪ Audience: SMEs – Leak Detection Engineers
▪ Leak Detection Systems Included: CPM
▪ What is being leveraged:
– Total CPM System(s) Alarm Count
– Alarm Count vs. Tuning Threshold & Tuning Frequency

▪ Other Considerations for continuous improvement

– Staff Trained in Leak Detection (%)
• Operations, SME, Management
– MOC Items Impacting Leak Detection (%)
– Pipelines Covered by CPM (%)
KPIs for Stakeholders
▪ Types: Program Level for CPM Accuracy, Reliability & Robustness
▪ Audience: LDS and LDP Stakeholders
▪ Leak Detection Systems Included: CPM
▪ What is being leveraged:
– API 1130 Test Results
– CPM Performance relative to API TR1149 design curve
– False Positive Indications per Month
• Tracked by operation state/type, e.g. transient, batching
– % Time a pipeline is shutdown due to leak alarms
– CPM system(s) availability during pipeline operations
(uptime/downtime)
• Loss of CPM tracked by cause
KPIs Utilized & Being Developed
Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Level Category
Leak Indication Recognition & Response Program Reliability
(CCEM) Sensitivity
Total CPM System Alarm Count System Reliability
Sensitivity
Alarm Count v Tuning Threshold & Frequency System Reliability
Sensitivity
Withdrawal Test Results Program Accuracy
Performance relative to API 1149 Program Accuracy
False Positive Indications/Month Program Reliability
Pipeline Shutdown due to leak alarms (% Time) Program Robustness
CPM System Availability (Uptime/Downtime) Program Robustness
Reliability
TransCanada Pipelines
Leak Detection System and Program KPIs
April 24-26, 2018 | St. Louis, Missouri
 Agenda

- TC Lagging KPIs when LOC

or Testing (Level 1-2)

- TC Leak Detection Systems KPIs

- TC Leading Leak Detection
Program KPIs (Levels 3-4)
- TC Leading LP Control Centre
Program KPIs (Level 4)

API RP 1175 Section 13.6 – Figure 3

TransCanada Leak Detection Program KPIs
(Lagging Level 1 and 2 measured when testing as
mentioned on API RP 1175)

• Time between LOC and leak alarm

• Number of large leaks where

continuous LD method alarmed

• Percentage error in identifying

the leak location by the LDS

Note: where continuous LD method was designed to identify leak

TransCanada Leak Detection Program
Goals & Objectives

1. Ensure high performing Leak Detection Systems

1.1 Maintain and improve LDS performance LDSs KPIs

1.2 Manage LDS issues and associated risks properly

2. Ensure Leak Detection Regulatory Compliance

3. Implement innovative Leak Detection solutions

4. Lead continuous improvement of Leak Detection

TransCanada Leak Detection System KPIs
(as defined on API 1130)

Sensitivity (2 hours) Trend

• Metrics: Reliability, Sensitivity, 0.98
Accuracy and Robustness
0 - 1.4
1.4 - 1.8

• Metrics measured per Pipeline % of Flow

1.8 - 2

System and LDS (CPMS – Primary

and Secondary)
2017 Nov Dec Jan Feb MTD 2018 YTD
0.96 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.94 0.98 % of Flow

• Performance Targets measured

Daily, Monthly and Quarterly
TransCanada Leak Detection System
KPIs Definitions
▪ Reliability: the total number of false alarms per day on the leak
detection systems

▪ Sensitivity: the 120 minute averaging window sensitivity ((Threshold /

Flow) expressed as a %) for an active flowing leak section

▪ Accuracy: the 120 minute averaging window absolute imbalance for

active flowing leak sections

▪ Robustness: the total reduction in capacity impact (throughput) due to

a LDS event (expressed as a %)
TransCanada Leak Detection Program KPIs
(Leading Level 3 – Operational Performance)
1. Ensure high performing Leak Detection Systems

1.2 Manage LDS issues and associated risks properly

1.2.1 Number of high priority LDS issues addressed

1.2.2 Number of high risk defects detected before deployed

1.2.3 Number of LDS issues addressed and closed on time

TransCanada Leak Detection Program KPIs
(Leading Level 3 – Operational Performance)
2. Ensure Leak Detection Regulatory Compliance

2.1 Meet LD regulations and follow industry recognized standards

and practices

2.1.1 Number of Non-compliances from external audits

2.1.2 Number of high priority non-conformances addressed

assessed, prioritized and scheduled within X days
TransCanada Leak Detection Program KPIs
(Leading Level 4 – Operating discipline and
management system performance)

3. Implement innovative Leak Detection solutions

3.1 Provide LD Project Engineering Support to Major Projects

3.1.1 % of projects where LDE was engaged early on

3.1.2 % Punch list items closed on time

TransCanada Leak Detection Program KPIs
(Leading Level 4 – Operating discipline and
management system performance)

4. Lead continuous improvement of Leak Detection

4.1 Maintain effective and efficient LD Technology Management

Portfolio

4.1.1 Number of successful implemented initiatives

TransCanada LP Control Centre Program KPIs
(Leading Level 4 – Operating discipline and
management system performance indicators )

• Number of controllers trained on the LDS console

• Number of controllers cross trained

• Number of changes performed to the Leak Detection System

• Number of MOC notifications pushed to controllers

 TC Leak Detection Program/System KPIs
Summary

TC Lagging
KPIs when
LOC or Testing
(Level 1-2)

TC Leak Detection TC Leak Detection

Systems KPIs Program Leading KPIs
(Levels 3-4)
TC LP Control Centre Program KPIs
(Level 4)

API RP 1175 Section 13.6 – Figure 3

“If you can't measure it, you can't improve it”.
Peter Drucker
Part 3 - Audience Q&A
▪ Please raise your hand if you have a question and wait for a
microphone

▪ Provide your name and company

How to Implement and Sustain?
▪ Leak Detection Program
Roadmap Handout

▪ Help guide companies with the

implementation & sustainability

▪ Follows the Plan-Do-Check-Act

approach (from API 1173 –
Pipeline Safety Management
Systems)
Additional Resources

▪ Remaining brochure’s from

last year’s leak detection
workshop

▪ API SMS Website

http://www.pipelinesms.org
– Go to “Get Started” Menu
– Go to Leak Detection
Program
RP 1175 Implementation Team’s Mission is Completed

Team Lead: Phillips 66 Pipeline Doug Sauer

Team Members: API Stuart Saulters

Buckeye Pipeline Rick Bishop
Chevron Pipe Line Robert Morgan
Enbridge Rick Barlow
LOOP Donny Chiasson
Marathon Pipe Line Jason Dalton
TransCanada Marieli Romero