The method and standards employed in the decommissioning and abandonment of offshore oil and gas pipeline assets at the end of their useful life are determined by a framework of national legislation, international protocols and treaties, and corporate governance standards. The framework will impose legal obligations upon operators to ensure marine environments are protected. Fines and penalties may be imposed if the asset owner fails to meet these requirements.A regulatory, or any similar, body will not prescribe a detailed planning process. Nonetheless, the body will usually expect to approve details from an asset owner on how the decommissioned activities will be planned, executed, and monitored within the regulatory framework. Additional requirements from other stakeholders within an operating company and corporate governance standards will also impose obligations on the decommissioning project.This paper describes an overview of a decommissioning plan which could be used to meet typical obligations required by regulatory frameworks. It will cover:
This paper is a case study on developing and implementing a pipeline integrity management system (PIMS) for a medium-enterprise operator in the Middle East. It explains the stepwise, collaborative, applied learning approach adopted by the operator’s focus group that helped to show the value proposition of the system to higher management at each phase. It further explains how this approach subsequently acted as a catalyst between project phases resulting in an operational risk-based PIMS. PIMS must address elements such as people (organized team of various disciplines contributing to the overall objective i.e. pipeline integrity management), process (standards, procedures, and policies on how to achieve the objective) and tools (resources to achieve the objective) to manage pipeline integrity. This paper describes the way BHGE (the consultant) and the operator have worked together and adopted a stepwise approach to address these elements to setup a PIMS within the constraints of a limited budget. The process consisted of PIMS gap analysis, development of PIMS manual and procedures and Excel-based comprehensive, semi-quantitative risk assessment, and is based on an effective contracting strategy that resulted in use of the PIMS consultant as a trusted partner. Pipeline operators fall into three common categories with respect to PIMS implementation: (1) those with large pipeline networks and substantial budgets for integrity management, (2) those with relatively small pipeline networks but relatively high integrity management budgets due to business-critical pipelines being part of the network, (3) those with a relatively small pipeline network and correspondingly small integrity management budget. This paper focuses on this third category of operators. Many challenges arise while implementing an integrity management system in any operation. This paper highlights these challenges and how they were resolved through knowledge transfer, a technical workshop, and an astute contracting strategy. It explains how the subject-matter experts (SMEs) from the consultant were used to manage the pipeline network through a risk-based approach before investing in in-house software tools and personnel. It also highlights the importance of a pilot phase which results in a detailed understanding of the scope and organization-specific requirements before deciding on major capital investment. It further explains how knowledge transfer and a cooperative relationship resulted in various stakeholders for the operator becoming brand advocates for the system. Also, the paper explains the practical steps adopted in setting up risk-based PIMS with a limited budget and how that could be used as a road map for other small-or medium-enterprise operators. And finally, it elaborates on the role played by the applied learning approach, knowledge transfer, inclusive relationships, a smart contracting strategy, and use of the consultant as a trusted partner to implement a risk-based PIMS with limited investment.
Hydrocarbon pipelines are high value assets which have to be kept operating at risks as low as reasonably practicable. An integrated Pipeline Integrity Management System (PIMS) environment enables practices that result in more efficient data maintenance and information reliability while providing consistent application of integrity procedures including risk assessment and risk management. Risk assessment can be done by adopting qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative methodologies. As pipeline operators progressively adopt operating strategies of continual risk management and risk reduction with a view to minimizing total expenditures within safety, environmental, and reliability constraints, the need for quantitative assessments of risk levels and setting of risk tolerability criteria is becoming evident. The advantages of quantitative risk assessment are that it is measurable and helps to identify specific segments in a pipeline where the mitigation measures should be applied. Hence a quantitative risk based approach is adopted by the operator for maintaining the pipeline system. The two components of risk are probability of failure and consequences of failure. The probability of failure is primarily driven by the nature of threats. The pipeline characteristics and operating conditions that increase the probability of failure change based on the threats and it is essential to identify and quantify those threats that increase the risk of a pipeline failure to effectively address the issue. The consequences of failure are primarily driven by loss of product and downtime of the asset which are subsequently dependent on three factors – (1) detection time, (2) isolation time and (3) repair time. This paper is a case study relating to a major producer in the Middle East on how they manage their pipelines and the role of risk assessment within their multiple pipeline integrity management system. It describes how software-assisted, data driven, quantitative risk assessment is utilized to identify and prioritize specific segments of the pipelines for risk mitigation. The paper explains the importance of gathering accurate data to conduct the quantitative risk assessment and how the risk model was developed in such a way that any anecdotal understanding of pipeline risks is avoided so that the risk results are essentially driven by facts and figures. The paper explains the organizational challenges faced by the operator when such a process is implemented, including the importance, in a large organization, of stakeholder engagement in the data gathering, risk assessment and decision making process and the methods adopted by the operator to overcome those challenges and obtain that engagement. The importance of implementing various company pipeline integrity management procedures and its role in ensuring collection of all the vital information in a timely manner, which can eventually be used for the pipeline risk assessments, are also explained. An overview of the risk model used is described including the various threat and consequence models. The criteria established for pipeline segmentation are also described in detail. Scenarios are provided, as examples, where the quantified risk of just one short segment increases the entire pipeline risk and how a small change in attribute and/or operating procedure can reduce the risk to an acceptable level. A discussion will also be included on how the risk engine supplies ‘what if' scenarios to demonstrate to what level the agreed mitigation activities reduce the risks prior to asset integrity expenditure. Thereby ensuring that mitigation actions are correctly directed and actually achieve their goal of maintaining pipeline risks at an acceptable level.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.