ASME PTB-12:2017 pdf free download – Guidelines for Addressing Data Gaps and Recordkeeping for ASME B31.4, B31.8 and B31.8S for Pipeline Integrity Management
The authors have made similar observations during their professional experiences with records review and management. There are occasions where operators have stored what are now recognized to be highly valuable records, but it is highly unusual that they stored them to meet any specific regulatory requirement. When highly valuable documents are discovered (particularly for pipe that was constructed prior to regulation and/or pipe that was acquired), they are frequently met with pleasant surprise. In 1938, American Standards Association ASA B31.1 first required that records be kept on welder qualifications and their identifying marks. Subsequent revisions expanded welder related record keeping. In 1955, B31.1.8 (which eventually became B31.8) first recommended basic risk based design concepts with 4 location class factors. It required the pipeline operator, or contractor, to maintain records related to welders and pressure testing. The standard was the first to recommend operations and maintenance records mentioning external and internal corrosion related to leaks and repairs, and inspection reports. A later revision in 1968 required recordkeeping related to corrosion inspection and leak investigation.
The federal pipeline regulations were passed in the 1960s with the first federal laws effecting liquid pipelines and the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968. Concurrent to these shifts in pipeline records requirements and expansion of the U.S. pipeline infrastructure indicated above was large amounts of population growth over the past 50-60 years. Pipelines had to be re-routed to accommodate the additional infrastructure (e.g., highways, waterlines) in congested areas, which created more records and/or additional pipeline system materials to track. The Natural Gas Integrity Management Rule 49 CFR Part 193 Subpart O was introduced in 2003, three years after a similar rule for liquid pipelines (49 CFR Part 195). Following the integrity management rules, operators were more frequently audited, which required them to focus more on material properties as part of risk modeling and fitness-for-service analysis. The gas (and, similarly, the liquid) integrity management (IM) rule specified how pipeline operators must identify, prioritize, assess, evaluate, repair, and validate the integrity of gas (or liquid) transmission pipelines that could, in the event of a leak or failure, affect High Consequence Areas (HCAs) within the U.S. The IM rules required large improvement in HCA-related record keeping for most operators in the U.S. [8]
1.1.2 CSA Z662 Canadian Standard
Association (CSA) standard Z662-15 provides a more flexible view of historical records with its requirements: “The format and level of detail associated with the material records specified in Clause 5.7 is not defined and is therefore at the discretion of the company. Although detailed documentation, such as mill test reports, often provide useful historical data for future reference (e.g., for engineering assessments pertaining to failure investigations or development of in-service welding procedures), it is not mandatory that such detailed documentation be retained as part of the permanent record. It is the intent that basic material data, such as material standards, specifications, grades, and dimensions, at a minimum, be included in the permanent records.” While the requirements of CSA Z662-15 may be a bit more flexible with respect to management of the pre- regulation era records, it allows operators to discard source records and doesn’t require operators to manage their data with any type of reliability or quality criteria.