1 / 15

PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety Montana Governor’s Task Force 11/15/2011

PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety Montana Governor’s Task Force 11/15/2011. Water Crossing Survey of Montana Petroleum Pipelines.

juniper-octavio
Download Presentation

PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety Montana Governor’s Task Force 11/15/2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PHMSAOffice of Pipeline SafetyMontana Governor’s Task Force11/15/2011

  2. Water Crossing Survey of Montana Petroleum Pipelines • Reason for Study: As a result of the July 2, 2011 crude oil spill into the Yellowstone River, ensure the integrity of petroleum pipelines at major water crossings that affect rivers in Montana. • Primary Purpose: Collaborate with State of Montana to compile an inventory of petroleum pipelines at water crossings and determine if they are currently safe.

  3. Other Purposes of Survey • Determine if additional steps are required before Spring 2012 run off. • Determine adequacy of pipeline operators’ patrolling methods and remedial actions at water crossings • Develop recommendations regarding: • Enhance PHMSA inspection guidance to ensure operators are meeting all aspects of regulations, particularly with respect to protecting their pipelines from water-related damage. • Identify possible regulatory changes to PHMSA leadership expanding the requirements for water crossings.

  4. Scope • Examined petroleum pipelines crossing streams and rivers affecting the upper Missouri River Basin. Focus on Montana and Northern Wyoming rivers flowing into Montana. • Collected pipeline information from operators regarding major (greater than 100 feet) river crossings. • Conducted field validation of submitted information. • Performed numerous right-of-way visits on pipelines where they crossed lesser streams to document the extent of flood damage.

  5. Limitations • Utilized Operator’s depth of cover survey information. • Could not visit all ROW areas either due to inaccessibility or lack of time. • Did not address numerous above ground spans where continued erosion may have increased the length of unsupported spans.

  6. Heightened Awareness • Recent Exxon Mobil spill and increased PHMSA focus on water crossings resulted in Operator’s assessing the conditions of the Right of Way. • Numerous mitigative actions are complete or underway.

  7. Information Collected (example) • Pipeline specifications • Installation dates • Major water crossing locations • Installation method (trench, bored) • Commodity • Date of latest hydrotest • ILI dates • Latest depth of cover survey

  8. Examples of what our inspectors looked for in field Focusing on the potential for pipe exposures • Evidence of upstream obstructions • Indications of channel deepening or localized scour • What type of channel, e.g. meandering, straight, braided? • Visible erosion of stream banks associated with crossing. • Stream stability issues known by landowners, Montana DNRC, local conservation district, concerned citizens.

  9. Basic Pipeline Statistics * Note: Montana Refining less than 5 miles with no water crossings

  10. Type of Construction at River Crossings • Percentage that are HDD versus open trench 82 Crossings (23 HDD vs 58 open trench w 1 unknown) • Number by year of crossing construction • 1940 to 1960 - 7 • 1961 to 1980 - 26 • 1981 to 2000 - 28 • Post 2001 – 4 • TBD – 17 (mostly reported as idled)

  11. Planned or Completed Improvements of Major River Crossings • ExxonMobil • Yellowstone River (Laurel) HDD completed (9/11) • HDD scheduled for Rock Creek and Clark’s Fork (start late November and complete by late January 2012) • CHS • HDD planned for Musselshell River (12/11) • Tongue River -TBD • ConocoPhillips - Survey received 11/11/11 (Exposures) • Completed Belt Creek remediation over Glacier P/L (8/11) • Judith (enhanced cover over Glacier P/L by 12/11) • Missouri (Glacier) and Gallatin (YPL) - TBD

  12. Other Exposed Pipeline Crossing Remediation Efforts (Preliminary) • CHS – Canyon Creek Span(Billings) and 3 small tributaries of Yellowstone (Lignite - HDD, O’Fallon-Lowering, and Diamond Ring Ranch - Relocation) – All by next spring • ExxonMobil – Canyon Creek Span (Billings) • ConocoPhillips – Belt Creek, Beauvais Creek (Lodge Grass), Beaver Creek (Winston), Beaver Creek (York), - All will be completed by end of year • Other recently revealed exposures on Conoco Phillips-_ • YPL Hauser, Seminoe Bitter Creek – Action TBD • Final Survey Results need to be reviewed in depth to identify other areas requiring remediation

  13. What concerns us most before next runoff season • What are PHMSA’s Immediate Concerns • Completion of Exxon’s Silvertip’s Rock Creek and Clarks Fork crossings. • CHS HDD – Musselshell River • Conoco Phillips – Missouri and Gallatin Rivers • Final Review of depth of cover surveys – Just coming in • Review IMP Plans to see whether cover is sufficient • Control Room Management Inspections (Eff. 10/2011)

  14. Next Steps • Aggregate data • Complete review of 2011 river crossing inspections • Develop enforcement actions for operator’s not addressing known risks • Inspect new pipeline construction atwater crossings • Improve coordination with State, including the need for safety enhancements at water crossings

  15. Comments or Questions?

More Related