Trade groups say leak, valve studies flawed

Recent studies conducted for the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) on liquids-pipeline leak detection and automatic and remotely controlled valves are flawed and may result in new government regulations that “could divert limited safety funds away from efforts that address the highest risk to public safety and the environment,” the American Petroleum Association (API) and the Association of Oil Pipe Lines (AOPL) contend.

The studies were conducted to determine the “technical, operational and economic feasibility and potential costs benefits of installing additional leak detection systems and valves.”

The API and AOPL in late January issued a joint letter to the PHMSA expressing their concerns and alleging that the studies failed to accomplish their mission because they “failed to gather, analyze or present the information PHMSA would need.”

The letter addressed to PHMSA Administrator Cynthia Quarterman was signed by Peter Lidiak, director of pipelines for the API, and by Andrew Black, chief executive and president of AOPL. The API and AOPL argue that the studies conducted by contractors presented “only academic discussions and technology vendor assertions without collecting data on actual field experiences on reliability, availability, maintainability, or costs.”

For example, pipeline operators use existing leak detection systems, especially internal methods of measuring flow and volume, to detect potential leak and ruptures. More experimental external detection technologies have so far proven unreliable and expensive, the letter alleges.

“In deciding whether to use additional or different leak detection systems, pipeline operators would have benefitted from a collection of real-world operational experiences to confirm or alleviate reliability and cost concerns,” the letter says.

Similar flaws exist in the study concerning valves, the letter argues. “Operators would have benefitted from additional research on the individual real-world scenarios and circumstances where additional valves would be helpful. Instead, the draft severely limited the scope of its analysis to a scenario that almost never happens, a worst-case spill with a complete shearing of the pipe, and not the smaller punctures or corrosion normally encountered by operators. This resulted in a gross overestimation of the potential benefit of these valves,” the letter says.

The studies also fail to address the feasibility of communication and power needs or an analysis of installation, maintenance and training costs, nor did they include a detailed survey of operator procedures, the letter says, concluding that the studies provides little practical value.

The leak detection systems study, released in December 2012, was conducted by Kiefner & Associates, Inc., based in Worthington, Ohio. The valves study, done in October 2012, was conducted by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

The PHMSA was expected to propose new regulations and requirements, based on its review of the studies.

Comments