Skip to content

Book References

References

1. “ALOHA (Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres),” software for dispersions of contaminants in the atmosphere, developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, October 1997.

2. AGA Plastic Pipe Manual for Gas Service, Catalog No. XR 8902, Arlington, VA: American Gas Association, February 1989.

3. American Petroleum Institute, “Evaluation Methodology for Software Based Leak Detection Systems,” API 1155, Washington, DC: API, February 1995.

4. American Petroleum Institute, “Pipeline Variable Uncertainties and Their Effect on Leak Detectability,” API 1149, Washington, DC: API, November 1993.

5. “ARCHIE (Automated Resource for Chemical Hazard Incident Evaluation),” prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Transportation, and Environmental Protection Agency, for Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures (approximate date 1989) and software for dispersion modeling, thermal, and overpressure impacts.

6. ASME Code for Pressure Piping, B31: “Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems,” ANSI/ASME B31.8, 1986 ed.

7. ASTM, “Standard Test Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials,” E23–93a, American Society for Testing and Materialism, July 1993.

8. Baker, W. E., et al., Explosion Hazards and Evaluation, New York: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., 1986.

9. Battelle Columbus Division, “Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures,” New York: American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1985.

9a. Beighle, B., engineering consultant, Benchmark Engineering LLC, Billings, MT, personal correspondence.

10. Bernstein, P. L., Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1998.

11. Bolt, R., and Logtenberg, T., “Pipelines Once Buried Never to be Forgotten,” in Reliability on the Move: Safety and Reliability in Transportation (G. B. Guy, Ed.), London: Elsevier Applied Science, 1989, pp. 195–207.

12. Bowman, B., U.S. Army, Special Forces Branch, personal correspondence.

13. Bray, J., “Political and Security Risk Assessment,” presented at Pipeline Risk Assessment, Rehabilitation, and Repair Conference, Houston, TX, September 13–16, 1993.

14. Briggum, S., Goldman, G. S., Squire, D. H., and Weinberg, D. B., Hazardous Waste Regulation Handbook, New York: Executive Enterprises Publications Co., 1985.

15. Brown, J., Collette, P., and Goffred, R., “Utilities Focus on Cast Iron Management Programs,” Pipeline and Gas Journal, Vol. 222, No. 3, March 1995.

16. Caldwell, J. C., “Pipe Line Safety Arena,” Pipe Line Industry, November 1990, p. 15. California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, October 2001.

17. Cameron, R. M., Halliday, W. S., and Stryker, R. A. “Electromagnetic Surveys of Pipelines and Cathodic Protection Systems,” PL Risk, September 1993.

18. Canadian National Energy Board, Joint Review Panel Commission Hearing Order GH-4-2001, “GSX Canada Pipeline Project; Application to Construct and Operate a New Natural Gas Pipeline and Related Facilities (in U.S. and Canada),” hearing held in Sidney, British Columbia, March 2003.

19. Clarke, N. W. B., Buried Pipelines, London: Maclaren and Sons, 1968.

20. Code of Federal Regulations, Vol. 59, No. 60, “Guidance for Facility and Vessel Response Plans Fish and Wildlife and Sensitive Environments,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, March 29, 1994.

21. Congram, G. E., “US Utility Expenditures Remain Near $6 Billion for 1995,” Pipeline and Gas Journal, December 1994.

22. Cornwell, J. B., and Martinsen, W. E., “Quantitative Risk Analysis of the Wahsatch Gas Gathering Pipeline System,” Norman, OK: Quest Consultants Inc.

23. Crane Valve Company, “Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe,” Crane Technical Paper No. 410, New York: CVC, 1986.

24. Davis, G., and Jones, D., “Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies,”

25. DIN 2413, Deutsche Normen, Berlin, June 1972.

26. Dow Chemical, Fire and Explosion Index Hazard Classification Guide, 6th ed., Dow Chemical Co., May 1987.

27. Dragun, J., The Soil Chemistry of Hazardous Materials, Silver Spring, MD: Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute, 1988.

28. Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association, “Polyethylene Encasement Brochure,” Ply. Tech/11-92/10M, Birmingham, AL: Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association.

29. Esparza, E. D., et al., Pipeline Response to Buried Explosive Detonations, Vols. I and II, Pipeline Research Committee Final Report AGA Project PR-15-109, Southwest Research Institute Final Report SWRI project 02-5567, American Gas Association, August 1981.

30. Federal Register, Rules and Regulations, Vol. 54, No. 155, August 14, 1989, pp. 33420–33424, August 30, 1989, pp. 35989–35990.

31. Flinn, R. A., and Trojan, P. K., Engineering Materials and Their Applications, 3rd ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1986, pp. 513–560.

32. Galley, M., Think Reliability, Houston, TX , personal communications.

33. Gas Research Institute, “Pipeline Inspection and Maintenance Optimization Program, PIMOS,” Final Report, prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, February 1998.

34. Gleick, J., Chaos, New York: Penguin Books, 1988.

35. Golder and Associates, “Report on Hazard Study for the Bulk POL Facilities in the POA Area,” prepared for Municipality of Anchorage POL Task Force, August 9, 2002.

36. “Government Guidelines: State and Federal Regulatory Briefs,” Pipeline and Gas Journal, May 1995.

37. Greenwood, B., Seeley, L., and Spouge, J., “Risk Criteria for Use in Quantitative Risk Analysis.”

38. Gummow, R., Wakelin, R., and Segall, S., “AC Corrosion—A New Threat to Pipeline Integrity?” presented at ASME International Pipeline Conference, 1996.

39. Hanna, S. R., and Drivas, P. J., Guidelines for Use of Vapor Cloud Dispersion Models, New York: American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1987.

40. Huges, D., Assessing the Future: Water Utility Infrastructure Management, American Water Works Association, 2002, Chap. 12.

41. Huges, D., Assessing the Future: Water Utility Infrastructure Management, American Water Works Association, 2002, Chap. 13.

42. Huges, D., Assessing the Future: Water Utility Infrastructure Management, American Water Works Association, 2002, Chap. 23.

43. Jaques, S., “NEB Risk Analysis Study, Development of Risk Estimation Method,” National Energy Board of Canada report, April 1992.

44. Pluss, C., Niederbaumer, G., and Sagesser, R., “Risk Assessment of the Transitgas Pipeline,” Journal of Pipeline Integrity, September 2002.

45. Kaplan, S., “The General Theory of Quantitative Risk Assessment,” in Proceedings of Fifth Conference on Risk Based Decision Making in Water Resources, ASCE, 1991.

46. Kelly, K. A., and Cardon, N. C., “The Myth of 10–6 as a Definition of Acceptance Criteria,” EPA Watch, Vol. 3, No. 17.

47. Keyser, C. A., Materials Science in Engineering, 3rd ed., Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 1980, pp. 75–101, 131–159.

48. Kiefner, J. F., “A Risk Management Tool for Establishing Budget Priorities,” presented at the Risk Assessment/ Management of Regulated Pipelines Conference, a NACE TechEdge Series Program, Houston, TX, February 10–12, 1997.

49. Larsen, K., et al., “Mitigating Measures for Lines Buried in Unstable Slopes,” Pipe Line Industry, October 1987, pp. 22–25.

50. Leeds, J. M., “Interaction between Coatings and CP Deserves Basic Review,” Pipeline and Gas Industry, March 1995.

51. Lockbaum, B. S., “Cast Iron Main Break Predictive Models Guide Maintenance Plans,” Pipe Line Industry, April 1994.

52. Martinez, F. H., and Stafford, S. W. “EPNG Develops Model to Predict Potential Locations for SCC,” Pipeline Industry, July 1994.

53. McAllister, E., Pipeline Rules Thumb, 5th ed., Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co., 1998.

54. Megill, R. E., An Introduction to Risk Analysis, 2nd ed., Tulsa, OK: PennWell Books, 1984.

55. Merritt, F. S., Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976, Sec. 21.

56. Microsoft Encarta and various Internet sources in the education field.

57. Miller, P. O., et al., “Dealing with Risk,” Canberra, Australia: The Institution of Engineers, March 1993.

58. Morgan, B., “The Importance of Realistic Representation of Design Features in the Risk Assessment of High-Pressure Gas Pipelines,” presented at Pipeline Reliability Conference, Houston, TX, September 1995.

59. Morgan, B., et al., “An Approach to the Risk Assessment of Gasoline Pipelines,” presented at Pipeline Reliability Conference, Houston, TX, November 1996.

60. Moser, A. P., Buried Pipe Design, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990.

61. Engberg, D. J., “Multiobjective Programming Models for the Planning of Offshore and Onshore Natural Gas Pipeline Systems,” Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 1980.

62. NACE, “Recommended Practice: Mitigation of Alternating Current and Lightning Effects on Metallic Structures and Corrosion Control Systems. National Association of Corrosion Engineers,” NACE Standard RP-01-77 (1983 Revisions), Item No. 53039.

63. National Energy Board, “Report of the Inquiry: Stress Corrosion Cracking on Canadian Oil and Gas Pipelines,” Report MH-2-95, November 1996.

64. National Transportation Safety Board, “Protecting Public Safety through Excavation Damage Prevention,” Safety Study NTSB/SS-97/01, Washington, DC: NTSB, 1997.

65. Naylor, C. E., and Davidowitz, D., “Brittle Behavior of Pipelines,” 94-DT-016.

66. Norman, R. S. “PE Technology Developments Aid Industry Safety, Cost Control,” Pipeline Industry, September 1994.

67. Office of Gas Safety, “Guide to Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA),” Standards Australia ME-038-01 (Committee on Pipelines: Gas and Liquid Petroleum), Risk and Reliability Associates Pty Ltd., April 2002.

68. “One-Call Systems,” Pipeline Digest, March 1991, p. 15.

69. Pipeline Industries Guild, Pipelines: Design, Construction, and Operation, London, New York: Construction Press, Inc., 1984.

70. Playdon, D. K., “Risk Mitigation Strategy Study for Alliance Pipeline,” Edmonton, Alberta: Centre for Engineering Research, May 1997.

70a. Porter, M., A. Baumgard, and K. W. Savigny, “A Hazard and Risk Management System for Large Rock Slope Hazards Affecting Pipelines in Mountainous Terrain,” Proceedings of IPC 2002: 4th International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Canada, September 2002.

70b. Porter, M., and K. W. Savigny, “Natural Hazard and Risk Management for South American Pipelines,” Proceedings of IPC 2002: 4th International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Canada, September 2002.

71. Proceedings of the International Workshop of Offshore Pipeline Safety (D. V. Morris, Ed.), New Orleans, LA, December 4–6, 1991, College Station: Texas A&M University.

72. Prugh, R. W., and Johnson, R. W., Guidelines for Vapor Release Mitigation, New York: American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1988.

73. Riordan, M. A., “The IR Drop Paradigm Calls for a Change,” Pipe Line Industry, March 1991, p. 31–32.

74. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press, 1983.

75. Rohrmann, B., “Verbal Qualifiers for Rating Scales: Sociolinguistic Considerations and Psychometric Data,” Project Report, Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne, September 2002.

76. Rusin, M., and Savvides-Gellerson, E., The Safety of Interstate Liquid Pipelines: An Evaluation of Present Levels and Proposals for Change, Research Study 040, Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute, July 1987.

77. Siegfried, C., “Multiple Uses of ROW for Pipelines,” presented at American Gas Association Transmission Conference, May 18, 1971.

78. Simiu, E., Reliability of Offshore Operations: Proceedings of an International Workshop, NIST Special Publication 833, Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.

79. Smart, J. S., and Smith, G. L., “Pigging and Chemical Treatment Pipelines,” presented at Pipeline Pigging and Inspection Technology Conference, Houston, TX, February 4–7, 1991.

80. Southey, R. D., Dawalibi, F. P., and Donoso, F. A. “Sharing the ROW can Affect Line Integrity,” Pipeline and Gas Journal, October 1993.

81. Stansberry, R. R., “Usually Sensitive Areas: A Definition for Pipeline Operators,” presented at API Pipeline Conference, Environmental Session, Dallas, TX, 1995.

82. Stephens, M., and Nessim, M., “Pipeline Integrity Maintenance Optimization—A Quantitative Risk-Based Approach,” presented at API Pipeline Conference, Dallas, TX, 1995.

83. Stephens, M. J., “A Model for Sizing High Consequence Areas Associated with Natural Gas Pipelines,” C-FER Topical Report 99068, prepared for Gas Research Institute, Contract 8174, October 2000.

84. Sutherland, V., and Cooper, C., Stress and Accidents in the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry, Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co., 1991.

85. Tuler, S., et al. “Human Reliability and Risk Management in the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel,” in Reliability on the Move: Safety and Reliability in Transportation (G. B. Guy, Ed.), London: Elsevier Applied Science, 1989, pp. 167–193.

86. URS Radian Corporation, “Environmental Assessment of Longhorn Partners Pipeline,” report prepared for U.S. EPA and DOT, September 2000.

87. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety, “Annual Report of Pipeline Safety—Calendar Year 1988,” 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, DC 20590.

88. Vick, Reagan, et al., 1989.

89. Vick, S. G., Degrees of Belief: Subjective Probability and Engineering Judgment, Reston, VA: ASCE Press, 2002.

90. Vincent-Genod, J., Fundamentals of Pipeline Engineering, Paris: Gulf Publishing Co., 1984.

91. Weber, B., DNV, personal communications and various past project studies.

92. Wheeler, D. J., and Lyday, R. W., Evaluating the Measurement Process, 2nd ed., Knoxville, TN: SPC Press, 1989.

93. Williams, P. J., Pipelines and Permafrost: Physical Geography and Development in the Circumpolar North, Reading, MA: Longman, 1979.

94. Wright, T., Colonial Pipeline Company, Atlanta, GA, personal communications.

95. Zimmerman, T., Chen, Q., and Pandey, M, “Target Reliability Levels for Pipeline Limit States Design,” presented at ASME International Pipeline Conference, 1996.

83 & 111. GRI-00/0189: A Model for Sizing High Consequence Areas Associated with Natural Gas Pipelines Topical Report, Prepared by: Mark J. Stephens of C-FER Technologies; Edmonton, Alberta T6N 1H2, Canada. C-FER Report 99068. Prepared for: Gas Research Institute, Contract No. 8174.

222. Muhlbauer, W. Kent. Pipeline Risk Management Manual, 3rd edition. Houston, Texas: Gulf Publishing Co, 2004.

333. Nessim et al. Target Reliability Levels for Design and Assessment of Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines. International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Alberta, 2004

777. REVIEW OF RULE BASED DESIGN AND RELIABILITY BASED DESIGN FOR ONSHORE PIPELINES Joe Zhou and Brian Rothwell, TransCanada PipeLines Limited Calgary, Alberta, Canada; Maher Nessim and Wenxing Zhou, C-FER Technologies, Inc. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

888. Proceedings of IPC 2004 International Pipeline Conference October 4 – 8, 2004 Calgary, Alberta, Canada IPC04-0321 TARGET RELIABILITY LEVELS FOR DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OF ONSHORE NATURAL GAS PIPELINES Maher Nessim C-FER Technologies Wenxing Zhou C-FER Technologies Joe Zhou TransCanada Pipelines Limited Brian Rothwell TransCanada Pipelines Limited Martin McLamb BP Exploration Operating Company

9988. CSA Z662.1-07 Oil and gas pipeline systems, Annex O, Aug 2008

999. Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, Feb 2006

777 Response of Buried Pipelines Subject to Earthquake Effects; M.J. O’Rourke, X. Liu; Monograph Series; Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research;

Copyright © 1999 by the Research Foundation of the State University of New

York and the Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research.

1001 Sources for Hydrogen Gas Trapped in the Annuli of Pipeline Repair Sleeves SAER-6153

A. Lewis, H. Badairy, S. Duval, B. Isidro, Y. Al-Janabi, S. Mehta, H. Al-Mutairi, T. Newbound, W. Al-Obaid, S. Al-Rassam, A. Al-Shahrani, A. Sherik, I. Al-Thaiban

Material Performance Group Research & Development Division Research & Development Center

D. Catte

Cathodic Protection & Coatings Unit

Materials Engineering & Corrosion Control Division

Consulting Services Department

T. Lewis

Pipelines Specialist Unit

Pipeline Technical Support Division

Pipelines Department

1002

The Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA) method

Anton A. Frederickson, Mr., Dr. Independent Consultant – member of Safety Users Group Network; 01 April, 2002

1003

Comparison of PFD calculation, SIL requirements according to IEC/EN 61508 and ISA-TR84.0.02 (1998) Prof. Dr. Ing. Habil. Josef Borcsok, HIMA Paul Hildebrandt GmbH Co KG, Industrial Automation

1004

“Pipelines Prove Safer Than Road or Rail”, D. Furchtgott-Roth, K.P. Green, Pipeline & Gas Journal, Dec 2013

1005

“Cost of Regulation Lessens With Coordination Among Agencies”, M. Purpura, Pipeline & Gas Journal, Dec 2013

1006

June 2014; http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline_replacement/

1007

“LDC’s Continue to Upgrade the Nation’s Gas Distribtuion Network”, R. Tubb, Pipeline & Gas Journal, Dec 2013

1008

“Natural Gas Odorization monitoring for Safety and Consistency”, D. Amirbekyan, N. Stylianos; Pipeline & Gas Journal, Dec 2013

1008

“anchors and threats, do we know enough?”, A. hussain, S. Eldevik, L. Collberg, DNV GL, World Pipelines, May 2014

1009

“cost effective application of the ALARP Principle”, Dr Simon Hughes, Senior Safety Consutant, ERA Technology,

1010

“Solving the cybersecurity puzzle”, D. Fox, URS Corporation; pipeline and gas journal, Feb 2013.

Chap 3?

Ref International Electrotechnical Commission:

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD IEC/FDIS 31010

Risk management — Risk assessment techniques

Reference number IEC/FDIS 31010:2009(E)

1011 Leak Detection Study – DTPH56-11-D-000001, September 28, 2012, kiefner and associates

Leak_Detection_Study__DTPH56-11-D-000001_R_Draft_final_10-04-2012.pdf

Leak Detection Study – DTPH56-11-D-000001 FINAL

0339-1201Kiefner and Associates, Inc. 3-22 October 2012

1012 Department of Housing and Urban Development. Safety Considerations in Siting Housing Projects, 1975. HUD Report 0050137

1013 K.S. Mudan and P.A. Croce. SFPE Handbook, chapter Fire Hazard Calculations for Large Open Hydrocarbon Fires. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, Massachusetts, 2nd edition, 1995.4

1014 NISTIR 6546 Thermal Radiation from Large Pool Fires, Kevin B. McGrattan, Howard R. Baum, Anthony Hamins ; Fire Safety Engineering Division[ Building and Fire Research Laboratory, November 2000, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce

1015 battelle, oak ridge lab, Valve Study

1016 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debris_flow

1017 PHMSA Advisory Bulletin on floods; ADB-2013-02

1018 going by various names: NPHI, Natural Disaster Study, National Pipeline Risk Index http://www.npms.rspa.dot.gov/data/data_natdis.htm

1019 http://www.nopsema.gov.au/resources/human-factors/human-error/

1020 INGAA vintage pipe

1021 API 579

1022 kiefner, stability of manufacture/construction defects

1023 IPC2008-64039

1024 mallaburn http://pipelineandgasjournal.com/accurate-pipeline-inspection-data-requires-more-pig?page=4; September 2014, Vol. 241, No. 9

1025 U.S. Coast Guard Hazard Assessment Handbook, Commandant Instruction Manual M 16465.13

1026 http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/AtmCorros/CorrMaps.htm

1027 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue

1028 Stewart, H.E. et al, “Pipeline Crossings of Railroads and Highways.” American Gas Association Operating Section Proceedings. 91-DT-60, 1991, pp 443-468.

  1. “Pipelines Prove Safer Than Road or Rail”, D. Furchtgott-Roth, K.P. Green, Pipeline & Gas Journal, Dec 2013
  2. Manhattan Institute for Policy Research Issue Brief; “Pipelines are Safest For Transportation of Oil and Gas”, 2013, http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ib_23.htm#.VPB7_Wd0z2A
  3. “Fuel-hauling Trains Could Derail at 10 a Year”, Daily Herald, Feb 2015; (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150222/business/150229640/)
  4. Muhlbauer, W. Kent. Pipeline Risk Management Manual, 3rd edition. Houston, Texas: Gulf Publishing Co, 2004

TTO Number 5 Integrity Management Program Delivery Order DTRS56-02-D-70036 Low Frequency ERW andLap Welded Longitudinal Seam Evaluation FINAL REPORT Revision 3 Submitted by: Michael Baker Jr., Inc. In association with: Kiefner and Associates, Inc. CorrMet Engineering Services, PC, April 2004

  1. Oil Pipeline Characteristics and Risk Factors: Illustrations from the Decade of Construction A December 2001Report Prepared by John F. Kiefner, President, Kiefner & Associates, Inc.; Cheryl J. Trench, President, Allegro Energy Group; copyright API
  2. INGAA, Integrity Characteristics of Vintage Pipelines, Battelle Memorial Institute, F-2002-50435. prepared by E. F. Clark, B. N. Leis, R. J. Eiber, Oct 2004.
  3. Battelle Final Report No. 13-001 Final Report Effectiveness of Hydrostatic Testing for Assessing the Integrity of ERW and Flash-weld Pipe Seams K. M. Kolovich and J. F. Kiefner Kieffner & Associates, Inc. January 15, 2013
  4. DoT PHMSA pipeline incident statistics: http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/portal/site/PHMSA/menuitem.6f23687cf7b00b0f22e4c6962d9c8789/?vgnextoid=fdd2dfa122a1d110VgnVCM1000009ed07898RCRD&vgnextchannel=3430fb649a2dc110VgnVCM1000009ed07898RCRD&vgnextfmt=print
  5. National Academies Press, TRB Special Report 311: Effects of Diluted Bitumen on Crude Oil Transmission Pipelines (2013) http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18381/trb-special-report-311-effects-of-diluted-bitumen-on-crude-oil-transmission-pipelines
  6. Exhibit A, Affidavit of John Kiefner
  7. “Comprehensive Study to Understand Longitudinal ERW Seam Failures”, Phase 1 Report, https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/matrix/PrjHome.rdm?prj=390
  8. Metallurgical reports on pressure test failures on Pegasus Pipeline, 12 reports dated 2005-2006, contained in EMPCO-CIV-750479.pdf

Index

Reductionism

Groundwater infiltration into low press distribution systems

Cyber threat, security

EMP, electromagnetic pulse

Weaponry

Solar flare, solar storm

Threaded connection, loosening of

Mechanical connection,

Residual stress

Sour gas, risk assessment excerpt

Prouction wells, sour gas

Thermal radiation,

Thermal radiation, effects of

Aerosol

Soil overburden, and dispersion

Effectiv wall thickness

Stress-carrying capacity

Available wall thickness

Rupture and mechanical effects

Mechanical effects from rupture

Hazaard zone

Mpy,

and external corrosion,

and internal corrosion,

and cracking

exposure, as part of PoF

mitigation, as part of PoF

resistance, as part of PoF

See acronym list

Aboveground facilities 44, 50-1, 227, 246

Abrasion, coating 89

Absolute risk estimates 15, 293-330

AC interference 83

Acceptable risk 334

Acute hazards 136, 381

Adhesion 89

Administrative processes 348-52

Age 233

facility 283

inspection (see also Information degradation) 31

pipeline 26, 30-1

system 30-1

of verification 105

ALARP (as low as reasonably practical) 337-40

Algorithms (see Risk)

Anchoring 48, 245

Animal attack 48-9

Anomaly 99, 107, 366, 381

Antifreeze 271, 280

Area of operation 163

As low as reasonably practical (see ALARP)

Aseismic faulting 113

Assessment (see Risk)

Atmospheric corrosion (see Corrosion)

Atmospheric stability classes 150, 309-10

Attack potential (see also Sabotage) 201-2

Automatic valve 162

Avalanche failure mode 143

B31G 366

Backfill 124-5, 381

Bacteria 72, 77

Barlow’s formula 94, 97, 364

Barriers 51, 204

Bathtub curve 6

Bias 31-2

Bimodal distribution 191

Biodegradation 140-2

Blast effects (see Over pressure effects)

BLEVE (boiling liquid, expanding vapor explosion; see also Vapor cloud) 135, 272, 307

Blockades 163

Blockages 214-5

Boiling liquid, expanding vapor explosion
(see BLEVE)

Boiling point 153, 155, 358-9

Bounding curve 299

Brittle fracture (see Fatigue) 143

Buckling 96, 250, 364

Buoyancy 250, 364

Burn radius (see also Fire,
Thermal radiation)

default 311

Business interruption (see Service)

Caliper pig (see Pigging)

Carbon dioxide (see CO2)

Carbon steel (see Steel)

Carcinogenicity 145

Casings 65-7, 70, 84-5, 96, 205, 381

Cast iron 226, 234

Cathode (see CP)

Cathodic protection (see CP)

Charpy V-notch tests (see Tests) 143

Check valve 160, 163, 381

Checklist,

Chronic hazards 136-8, 381

CIS (close internal survey; see also Pipe-to-soil potential, DCVG) 81,
128, 231, 381

Class location (see Third party)

Close internal survey (see CIS)

Cloud

dispersion/size of 149-59, 309, 328

vapor (see also Vapor) 135

CO2 72, 211-2

Coatings 36, 85-90, 125, 381

application of 87

for atmosphere 68-70

concrete 234

conditions 26, 230

defects (see also Cracks, Fatigue)
89, 366

inspection (see also Inspection of) 89

internal 73

offshore 249

Combustible 137, 155, 359

Commissioning 38

Communications

of risk 352-5

SCADA (see SCADA)

Community partnering 201-3

Composite pipelines 234

Compressor, sabotage
(see Sabotage)

Computer 37-8, 183-6

environments 183-94

permissive 280

programs 38

software 186

use in risk program 37-8, 185

Concrete pipe 234

Concrete slab, failure probability 298

Conductivity (see Terrain)

Confidence limits 304-5

Consequences 6

Construction 38, 124-5

distribution systems 234-7

facilities 269

issues 99

offshore 253-4

Containment 164

Contamination 135, 153, 155, 211, 272, 321, 376

Continuous improvement (see also Quality) 18, 342

Control documents (see Documents)

Correlation 192

Corrosion 40, 44, 61-90, 99, 109, 267-8, 381

atmospheric 32-71, 229, 248, 267, 284

buried metal 284

crevice (see also ERW pipe) 98

distribution systems 228-33

facilities 267-8, 283-6

galvanic 75

hydrogen stress corrosion cracking (see HSCC)

internal 71-4, 229-30, 248, 267, 283, 382

offshore 247-9

product 72

rate 64, 233

selective seam 98

subsurface 74-90, 230, 248, 267

Costs

direct 220-1

indirect 221-2

risk management 344-8

Counterfeit materials 124

Cover (see Depth of cover)

CP (cathodic protection) 75, 230-1, 249, 284, 379, 381

corrosion threat 78-85

surveys 78-82

Crack arrestors 144-5

Cracks (see also HIC, HSCOS, SCC, Fatigue, Fractures) 102-4, 110, 144-5, 234, 366

Critical instruments 131

Cumulative risk (see CR)

Current 168, 250-3

Customers 18, 210, 217

Damage (see also Resistaance) 317

prevention 246

states 306, 314-6, 319-27

Data collection 10-11, 179

Data management and analyses 177-96, 226

DC interference 84

DCVG (direct current voltage gradient; see CIS, Pipe-to-soil potential)

Deductive reasoning 2-3

Defect (see also Anomaly, Crack, Fracture) 366

Degradation

inspection (see Information)

information (see Information)

Delivery parameters deviation (see DPD)

Dent 366

Department of Transportation (see DOT)

Depth of cover 178

distribution 227

failure probability 298

offshore 245

survey 128, 380

third party 46-8

Design 38, 40, 44

distribution systems 234-7

facilities 268-9

human errors 119

index 91-115, 118

offshore 249-52, 253

pressure 94

Detection opportunity 56

Deterioration (see Corrosion)

Detonation (see Vapor cloud)

Direct current voltage gradient (see DCVG)

Direct evidence 34, 90, 105-10

Dispersion 148-9, 156, 190

Distribution systems 223-42

Documents 29, 129, 132, 281

computer 188-9

control 349, 352

Dosage (see Toxicity)

Dose-response assessment 140-2

DOT (Department of Transportation) 165, 259, 328, 382

DPD (delivery parameters deviation) 214-6

Drain volumes 142, 147-8, 382

Drinking water contamination 321

Drug test 128, 238

Ductile iron 234

Ductility 143

Dynamic segmentation 26, 181-2

EA (environmental assessment) 170

Earthquake (see Seismic)

Education (see Public)

Electric resistance welding pipe (see ERW)

Electrolyte (see Soil corrosivity)

Electromagnetic surveys 53

Emergency drill 218

Emergency response 162, 255

Employee stresses (see Stressors)

Entropy 1

Environmental

assessment (see EA)

hazards (see Hazardous)

module 166-9

not involving pipe spills 167

persistence (see Biodegradation)

sensitive areas 167-8

shoreline 168-9

Equivalent surface area 265

Erosion (see also Land movement, Soil) 113, 254

ERW pipe (electric resistance welding pipe)
98, 366, 382

Estuaries 168

Evacuation 163

Event tree 14, 25

Events (see Risk variables)

Evidence

direct 34, 90, 105-10

unquantifiable 16

Expert judgment 8

Explosion (see Overpressure)

Explosion limit (see also LFL) 149

Exposure 45, 66

Exposure pathways (see Toxicity)

External loadings 94, 96, 97, 266, 364

Facilities (see also Aboveground) 100, 257-92

Failure 4, 301, 314, 382

Failure mechanisms/modes 99

Failure modes and effects analysis (see FMEA)

Failure probability (see also Failure rate) 299-302, 314, 320

Failure rate 5-7, 294-8, 312-6, 319-20

Failure investigation (see Inspection)

Fatalities (see also Value of human life) 295-6, 305-6, 321, 355, 375

Fatigue 102-4, 143, 234, 236, 250, 268, 382

Fault tree analysis 14, 25

FBE (fusion bonded epoxy) 78

Fences (see Barriers)

Fire/ignition scenarios (see also Thermal radiation) 135, 149, 272, 309

probability 302-4

Fixed length segmentation (see also Sectioning) 26, 181

Flammability limits (see also Ignition) 359

Flange 101

Flash point 137

Flashing fluids (see also HVL) 361-2

Flexible pipe 235

Flowpath modeling 148

Fluid modulus 367

FMEA (failure modes and effects analysis) 14

Fracture mechanics 143-6, 366

Fracture toughness 102-4, 143-6, 382

Fractures (see also Cracks) 102-4, 110, 143

Frequency 5, 32, 319

Frost heave 112

Fusion bonded epoxy (see FBE)

Fuzzy logic 3

Galvanic corrosion (see Corrosion)

Gas release (see Release)

Gas Research Institute (see GRI)

Gas spill (see Spill)

Geographic information system (see GIS)

GIS (geographic information system) 179

Global positioning system (see GPS)

GPS (global positioning system) 53, 179

Gravity flow pipe (see Concrete pipe)

GRI (Gas Research Institute) 45, 306, 369

Ground/air interface 66

Ground-penetrating radar 53

Groundwater (see Contamination)

Handling, during installation 125

HAZ (heat affected zone) 103-4, 382

Hazard 110-5, 136-42, 281, 382

definition 3

identification 119

natural 110-112, 250-3

zone 172-4, 306-16

Hazard and operability study (see HAZOP)

Hazard ranking system (see HRS)

HAZOP (hazard and operability study) 14, 25

HCA (high consequence area) 166

HCL (high-low-close) chart 192

Heat affected zone (see HAZ)

Heat of combustion 359, 272, 155

Heat flux (see Thermal radiation)

HIC (hydrogen induced cracking) 78, 103

High consequence area (see HCA)

High population area (see HPA)

High value area (see HVA)

High-low-close (see HCL)

Highly volatile liquid (see HVL)

Histogram (see also Frequency) 190

Historic areas 170

Hole size (see also Materials, Fracture mechanics, Charpy test, Spill size, Rupture, Cracks, Stress) 142-6, 303, 314-5

Holiday (see Coating defect)

Holiday detection (see Coatings, Inspection)

Housekeeping and human error 128

HPA (high population area) 166

HRS (hazard ranking system) 152

HSCC (hydrogen stress corrosion cracking) 77-8

Hueristics 31-2

Human error (see also Procedures for prevention, Incorrect operations) 117-8, 197-200, 265, 278, 280-2

Human life, value of (see Value of human life, Fatalities)

Humidity

HVA (high value area) 168

HVL (highly volatile liquid) 147-8, 259, 272, 311, 340

Hydrogen embrittlement (see HIC, HSCC)

Hydrogen stress corrosion cracking (see HSCC)

Hydrostatic pressure test (see Test)

Ice, scour from 254

Ignition (see also Fire) 302-4

ILI (in-line inspection; see also Inspections) 34-5, 90, 379, 382

Impact resistance

Impressed current (see CP)

Incorrect operations (see also Human error)
40, 44, 102, 117-32

distribution systems 237

facilities 268-71

index 117-132, 205, 237

offshore systems 253-5

sabotage 205

Induced current (AC) 83

Inductive reasoning 2-3

Information degradation 31, 64

Inhibitor (see Internal corrosion)

Injuries (see Fatalities)

In-line inspection (see ILI; see also Inspections)

Inspection (see also Survey) 124

age 31, 105

construction

degradation (see Information degradation)

internal (see also Pigging) 107

sabotage potential (see Sabotage)

techniques 379

visual 36, 380

Integrity

assessments 29, 109-10

verification 100, 105-10, 236-7, 250, 268

Insulation 66

Intelligence gathering (see Sabotage)

Intelligent pigging (see Pigging)

Interference currents 82-5

Internal corrosion (see Corrosion)

Internal inspection (see Inspection)

Internal inspection tool (see Inspection)

Internal pressure 94

Interview data 31

IR drop (see also Corrosion) 79-80

Jet fire (see also Fire/ignition scenarios) 149, 308

J-lay offshore pipe installation technique

JNA (job needs analysis) 270

Joining of materials 124

Joints (joining) 124, 234-5, 382, 383

JSA (job safety analysis) 270

JTA (job training analysis) 270

Key-lock sequence programs 131

Lacustrine regions 168

Laminations 98

Land movements 110-5, 237, 252, 268, 282, 382

Land use issues (see also Set back distances) 344

Landslides 93, 110-5

Leak detection 159-162, 315

capabilities of 159-63

by odorization 241

staffing levels 272-5

at stations 272-5

techniques 159-63

Leak history 35

Leak impact factor (see LIF)

Leak rate 361-2

Leak volume 142

Length effects of segmentation

Length effects when roll-up, aggregations

Level of proof 118

LFL (lower flammability limit) 149

LIF (leak impact factor) 40, 44, 99, 104, 133-75,
191-4, 382

Line locating 51-53

Line marking 52

Liquid release (see Release, Spill)

Load 92, 254

Locating (see Line, Pipeline)

Lock-out devices 131

Logic

deductive (see Deductive reasoning)

inductive (see Inductive reasoning)

ladders 131

Loss limiting actions 164

Lower flammability limit (see LFL)

Magnetic flux (see ILI)

Magnetic methods 53

Maintenance 239-40, 255

facilities 271

human error 132

prioritization 343

reports 29

schedule 132

Management of change (see MOC)

Manufacturing, pipe 98, 179

MAOP (maximum allowable operating pressure) 94-110, 362, 382

Maps and records 129

Marking (see Line marking)

Materials 38

selection 123-4

stress (see Stress)

strength 97

toughness 143

Matrix 25

Maximum allowable operating pressure (see MOP)

Maximum operating pressure (see MOP)

Maximum permissible pressures (see also MOP) 94

Mean 189-90

Measurements 190

Mechanical effects 135, 231-2

Mechanical error preventers 131-2, 239, 271

Median 189-90

Metallurgy (see also Toughness, Fracture

mechanics) 143

Meter stations 259

MIC (microbially induced corrosion) 77

Microbially induced corrosion (see MIC)

Microorganisms (see MIC)

Mill certifications (see also Pipe strength) 99

Minimum test pressure (see MTP)

Mitigations 41, 57-60, 114-5, 154, 202, 254, 298, 342-4

MOC (management of change) 269-70

Model

calculating variables 34

choices 25

design checklist 11

examples 369-73

facility 275-86

indexing 24, 25

matrix 23

modeling 3, 9-10

performance test 17-8, 194

probabilistic 23-4

qualitative 16

quantitative 16

release 146-8

risk 11, 14, 22-33, 39, 225, 264, 333, 350

scope and resolution 30

Molecular weight 151, 155, 157, 158

Monte Carlo simulation (see Sensitivity analysis)

MOP (maximum operating pressure) 94, 119-20, 363

National Fire Protection Association (see NFPA)

Natural hazards (see also Hazards) 110-112, 250-3

NDE (nondestructive evaluation; see also NDT) 285

NDT (nondestructive testing; see also NDE) 89, 380

Negligible risk (see Acceptable risk)

Network (see Computer)

NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 136, 276

Nondestructive evaluation (see NDE)

Nondestructive testing (see NDT)

NRA (numerical risk assessment) 23, 294

Numerical risk assessment (see NRA)

Odorizations 241

Offshore (see also Platform) 243-56

One-call systems 44, 51-3, 227

hit rate 45

reports 28

One-in-a-million chance 341

OPA (other populated area) 166

Operators (see also Training) 22, 29

Operations (see also Incorrect) 125, 216

data 29

distribution 238

facilities 269

offshore 254

Organic 37

Oscillations (see Vortex, Wave)

Other populated area (see OPA)

Outage period 220

Outside force (see Third-party damage)

Overpressure (blast) effects 150, 173, 306, 311

Painting (see Coatings, Atmospheric)

Palustrine regions 168, 382

Particle trace analysis 148

Patrol 30, 54-7, 247, 380

PE (polyethylene pipe) 234

Performance tests, model (see Model)

Permeability 26, 157

pH, soil 77, 78

Photolysis (see Biodegradation)

Pigging (see also Inspection) 74, 107, 128, 382

PIM (pipeline integrity management) 259

Pinhole leak (see Hole size)

Pipe strength 92-101, 143-6, 363-6

Pipeline

construction 93-4, 99

depth 298

dynamics 213

installation (see J-lay, S-lay)

integrity management (see PIM)

locating (see Line locating)

operators (see Operators)

products 357-9

properties (characteristics) 112

seam (see also ERW) 98

strength (see also Materials) 363-8

wall flaws 110

Pipe-to-soil potential (see also CIS, DCVG) 81-2

Plastic 234-6

Platform (see Offshore)

Point event 179-80

Polarization (see Surveys)

Political instability (see Sabotage)

Polyethylene pipe (see PE)

Polyvinyl chloride pipe (see PCP)

Pool size, liquid spill 151-53

Population density 26, 28, 30, 128, 165-6, 263, 305

Potential (see Surge)

Potential damage (see also Sabotage, Third-party damage) 99

Potential threats 56

Potential upset (see Upset)

PPA (pressure point analysis; see Leak detection)

PPM (predictive preventive maintenance) 132, 280

PRA (probabilistic risk assessment) 23-25, 294

Predictive preventive maintenance (see PPM)

Presentation graphics 188

Pressure, maximum (see also MOP) 94

Pressure point analysis (see PPA)

Pressure switch (see Safety)

Pressure test (see Test)

Pressure vessel 101

Preventions 29, 73

Prioritization, of mitigation 343

Probabilistic risk assessment (see PRA)

Probability (see also Failure probability) 4-5, 104

of exceedance 113

Procedures

for human error prevention (see also Human error) 132, 281

for internal corrosion (see Corrosion)

maintenance (see Maintenance)

for risk program administration 352

for surge (see Surge)

Process safety management (see PSM)

Product

characteristics (see Product hazard)

contamination (see Contamination)

corrosivity (see Corrosion)

hazard 136-42, 272, 383

specifications deviation (see PSD)

Programs (see Computers)

Property, high value (see HVA, Land use, Set back distances)

PSD (product specification deviation) 211-4

PSM (process safety management) 259

Public education 44, 53, 228, 246, 383

Pumps, sabotage (see Sabotage)

PVC (polyvinyl chloride pipe)

QRA (quantitative risk assessment)
23, 294, 329-30, 337

Quality 18, 32, 182, 346

assurance (QA) and Control (QC) 182-3

data 181-2

Qualitative model (see Model)

Quantitative risk assessment (see QRA)

Quantitative model (see Model)

Radar (see Ground penetrating)

Radiant heat (see Thermal radiation)

Radiation, thermal (see Thermal)

Radio frequency detection (see RF detection)

Range (see Dispersion)

Rangeability (see Dispersion)

Rate (see Corrosion)

Reaction times 163

Reactivity 137-8

Receptor (see also LIF) 165, 170-4, 241-2, 255, 305-6, 375-7

Rectifier 80, 82, 383

Rehabilitation 236

Release (see also Leak, Spill) 147, 383

Reliability 19

Relief valves (see Safety system)

Remote terminal units (see RTU)

Remote valve 160, 163

Remotely operated vehicle (see ROV)

Reportable quality (see RQ)

Request for proposal (RFP; see Proposals)

Resistivity (see Soil)

Resource allocation 343

Revenues from pipeline 220

RF detection (radio frequency) 52-3

RFP (request for proposal; see Proposals)

Rigid pipe 234

Risk

absolute 15

acceptable 334

algorithms 278, 369-73

assessment methods 7-8, 10, 22, 36

communications 352

comparisons 355

criteria 336-42

cumulative 333

decision points

definition 4

of environmental damage (see

Environmental)

factors 29

individual 335

management 7, 13, 10, 18, 22, 178,
225, 331-55

management program (see RMP)

model (see Model)

other 355

process 9-10

program administration 348-352

relative 15, 44

roll ups (see aggregation)

of sabotage (see Sabotage)

scope 30

societal 335

variables 22-4, 45, 94-110, 178, 263

Riverian regions 168, 383

River crossing survey 47

RMP (risk management program) 348

Root cause analysis 36

ROV (remotely operated vehicle) 251

ROW (right of way) 29, 38, 383

condition 44, 54, 228

distribution systems 228

facilities 257-9

offshore 247

RQ (reportable quality; see also
Chronic hazards) 138

RSTRENG 366

RTU (remote terminal unit) 126

Rupture (see Hole size)

Sabotage (see also Incorrect operations) 200-206

attack potential 201

distribution systems 240

mitigations (see also Mitigations) 202

potential for (see Potential threats)

Safety

facilities 268

factor 94-102, 236, 250

programs 128

systems 119-23, 238, 279, 383

SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) 120, 126-8, 238, 257,
270, 281, 383

SCC (stress corrosion cracking) 78, 103, 383

Scientific method 2

Scope 13

Scoring 182

Scour 113

Screening analysis 15

Seabed stability 252

Secondary containment 142, 148, 154,
272, 383

Sectioning (see Segmenting)

Security forces 282

Segmenting 10, 22, 26, 102, 178, 226,
260-1

data 181

distribution systems 226

manually establishing 26

risk 323

Seismic 112-3, 254, 383

Seismograph activity 48-9

Sensing devices 163

Sensitivity analysis 195-6

Service interruption 209-22, 263

Set back distances 311-12

Shear 363

Signal-to-noise ratio 333

Signs 51, 54, 245, 247

S-lay offshore pipe installation technique 253

Smart pig (see Pigging)

SMYS (specified minimum yield strength) 78, 364, 383

Sniffers 160

Societal versus individual risk 335-6

Software (see Computer)

Soil

conditions 26, 30, 36

conductivity 53

corrosivity 76-8

movement (see Land movement)

permeability 26, 157

pH 77, 78

resistivity 77, 85

settling 111

shrinking 111

spill penetration 147

swell 111

Sour gas 328-9

Spans 96

Spatial analyses 181

Special loadings 94

Specifications 211-3

pipe (see SMYS)

Specified minimum yield strength (see SMYS)

Spending prioritization (see also Cost) 343

Spill (see also Leak, Release) 142, 147

adjustments to size 159-65

migration 153-4

offshore 255

pool size 151-3

score 104, 146

size 148-59, 240-1, 272, 312-29

Spill limiting actions (see also Spill)

offshore 255

SQL (structured query language) 179

SSCC (sulfide stress corrosion cracking) 103

Staffing levels and leak detection 272

Standard deviation 190

State soil geographic (see STATSGO)

Stations (see Facilities)

Statistics 5, 189-92

STATSGO (state soil geographic) 77, 78

Steel, carbon (see also Fatigue) 234

Steel mills 99

Strain gauge (see also Land movement) 114-5

Stress 144-5, 197-200, 363, 383

concentrations 366

corrosion cracking (see SCC)

human errors (see also Human errors) 197-8

hydrogen stress corrosion cracking (see HSCC)

hydrostatic test (see Test)

levels and fatigue (see Fatigue)

longitudinal 364

MAOP (see MAOP)

materials (see Materials)

riser 366

soil movement (see Soil, Land movement)

temperature 211, 365

tensile 364

wall thickness calculations 99

Stress corrosion cracking (see SCC)

Stressors, workplace 197-8

Structured query language (see SQL)

Subjective risk assessment 16

Subsurface corrosion (see Corrosion)

Successive reactions 267

Sulfates 72, 211-2

Sulfide stress corrosion cracking (see SSCC)

Supervisory control and data acquisition (see SCADA)

Supports 66

Surge 250, 383

potential 30, 104-5, 236, 250, 268

pressure calculations 367-8

pressure s. (pressure spike) 104, 367

water hammer (pressure s.) 104, 367

Surveillance (see Patrol)

Surveys (see also CIS, DCVG, Inspections) 29-30, 128-9

air patrol 128

close interval (see CIS)

coating condition 128

holiday detection (coatings)

leak (see also Leak) 380

line locating (see Line locating)

pigging (see also Pigging) 128

polarization 81-2

population density (see also Population density) 128

route 93

soil movements (see Soil, Land movements)

subsea (sonar) profile 128, 251

thermographic 128

water crossings 128, 380

System integrity

distribution system 225

System losses

distribution system 225

System safety factor (see also Safety)
120

System strength 94

Tanks 260, 285

Technique, choosing 16

Temperature (see also Stress) 211, 365

Terrain conductivity (see Soil)

Test leads (see Cathodic protection,
Pipe-to-soil potential, Inspection)

Tests

Charpy (see also Charpy) 143

model performance (see Model)

nondestructive (see NDT)

pressure (hydrostatic) 30, 108-9, 379, 382

Thermal damage potential 146

Thermal effects 152-3, 173

Thermal radiation (see also Fire, Burn radius)
138, 306-9

Third-party damage 28, 40, 43-54, 93,
118, 383

distribution systems 227-34

exposure

facilities 282-3

hit rate 45

mitigation analysis 57-60

offshore 244-7

stations 282-3, 173

Threat assessment (see Sabotage)

Toughness, of pipe (see Fracture mechanics)

Toxicity 138-42

Toxicological risk assessment 16, 142

TQM (Total Quality Management,
see Quality)

Traffic 266, 283

Training 30, 129-31, 218, 270-1

Tsunamis 113, 250

UFL (upper flammability limit) 149

Ultrasonic ILI (see ILI)

Unaccounted for gas 225

Uncertainty 8, 25, 333

Unconfined vapor cloud explosion
(see Cloud, Vapor cloud)

Uniform color code 53

Upper flammability limit (see UFL)

Upset potential 72, 211

Vacuum extraction 53

Value

added work 18

of human life (see also Fatalities) 347

of mitigation (see Mitigation)

Valves

automatic (see also Automatic) 162

causing surges (see Surge)

check valve (see Check)

relief v. (see Relief)

remote v. (see Remote)

spacing of 163

three-way 131

Vandalism (see Sabotage)

Vapor

clouds (see also Clouds) 135, 149, 307, 309

dispersion 309

releases 146

toxic 142, 150-1

Variability

variation 8, 10-1, 190

Variables (see Risk)

Vehicles (see Traffic)

Vibration monitoring 276, 279

Visual (see Inspections)

Volumes (see Spill size)

Vortex shedding 250-1

Wall thickness 94, 98, 383

probability failure 298

Warning tape, mesh 46-7

Waste (see Quality)

Water crossing surveys (see Surveys)

Water hammer (see Surge)

Wave action 168, 250-2

Weather 267, 282

Weighting 25, 32, 33

Welding (see Joining)

Wetlands 168, 327, 377

What-if trials 186, 196

Wildlife (see Animal attack)

Workplace stressors (see Stressors)

X-ray (see Inspection)

Zone-of-Influence 35, 180-1