You are on page 1of 18

Risk Assessment Data Directory

Report No. 434 – 4


March 2010

Riser &
pipeline
release
frequencies
International Association of Oil & Gas Producers
P ublications

Global experience
The International Association of Oil & Gas Producers has access to a wealth of technical
knowledge and experience with its members operating around the world in many different
terrains. We collate and distil this valuable knowledge for the industry to use as guidelines
for good practice by individual members.

Consistent high quality database and guidelines


Our overall aim is to ensure a consistent approach to training, management and best prac-
tice throughout the world.
The oil and gas exploration and production industry recognises the need to develop consist-
ent databases and records in certain fields. The OGP’s members are encouraged to use the
guidelines as a starting point for their operations or to supplement their own policies and
regulations which may apply locally.

Internationally recognised source of industry information


Many of our guidelines have been recognised and used by international authorities and
safety and environmental bodies. Requests come from governments and non-government
organisations around the world as well as from non-member companies.

Disclaimer
Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this publication,
neither the OGP nor any of its members past present or future warrants its accuracy or will, regardless
of its or their negligence, assume liability for any foreseeable or unforeseeable use made thereof, which
liability is hereby excluded. Consequently, such use is at the recipient’s own risk on the basis that any use
by the recipient constitutes agreement to the terms of this disclaimer. The recipient is obliged to inform
any subsequent recipient of such terms.
This document may provide guidance supplemental to the requirements of local legislation. Nothing
herein, however, is intended to replace, amend, supersede or otherwise depart from such requirements. In
the event of any conflict or contradiction between the provisions of this document and local legislation,
applicable laws shall prevail.

Copyright notice
The contents of these pages are © The International Association of Oil and Gas Producers. Permission
is given to reproduce this report in whole or in part provided (i) that the copyright of OGP and (ii)
the source are acknowledged. All other rights are reserved.” Any other use requires the prior written
permission of the OGP.
These Terms and Conditions shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Eng-
land and Wales. Disputes arising here from shall be exclusively subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of
England and Wales.
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

contents
1.0 Scope and Definitions ........................................................... 1
1.1 Application ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Definitions ....................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Summary of Recommended Data ............................................ 2
3.0 Guidance on use of data ........................................................ 3
3.1 General validity ............................................................................................... 3
3.2 Uncertainties ................................................................................................... 3
3.3 Application of frequencies to specific pipelines ......................................... 3
3.3.1 Offshore pipelines...................................................................................................... 4
3.3.2 Onshore pipelines ...................................................................................................... 6
3.4 Application to pipelines conveying fluids other than hydrocarbons ........ 6
4.0 Review of data sources ......................................................... 6
4.1 Basis of data presented ................................................................................. 6
4.1.1 Risers and offshore pipelines ................................................................................... 6
4.1.2 Onshore gas pipelines............................................................................................... 8
4.1.3 Onshore oil pipelines................................................................................................. 9
4.2 Other data sources ....................................................................................... 10
5.0 Recommended data sources for further information ............ 11
6.0 References .......................................................................... 11
6.1 References for Sections 2.0 to 4.0 .............................................................. 11
6.2 References for other data sources.............................................................. 11

©OGP 1
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

Abbreviations:
AGA American Gas Association
ANSI American National Standards Institute
API American Petroleum Institute
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
CONCAWE Conservation of Clean Air and Water in Europe
DNV Det Norske Veritas
DOT (US) Department of Transportation
EGIG European Gas Pipeline Incident Data Group
ESDV Emergency Shutdown Valve
PARLOC Pipeline And Riser Loss Of Containment
UK HSE United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive
UKOPA United Kingdom Pipeline Operators’ Association
VIV Vortex Induced Vibration

2 ©OGP
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

1.0 Scope and Definitions


1.1 Application
This datasheet presents (Section 2.0) frequencies of riser and pipeline releases.
Frequencies for offshore and onshore pipelines are included.
The frequencies given are based on analysis for pipelines conveying hydrocarbons.
They may be applied to pipelines conveying other fluids as discussed in Section 3.4.

1.2 Definitions
The pipeline frequencies are given for four different sections as shown in Figure 1.1.
Risers are considered to comprise three sections:
• Above water (often taken to be the topsides section below the riser ESDV)
• Splash zone (exposed to aggressive corrosion conditions and ship collisions)
• Below water (to the flange connection with the pipeline or a spool piece)

Figure 1.1 Definition of Pipeline Sections

For offshore sections, frequencies are given for steel and flexible risers and pipelines.
“Flexible” should be understood in the context of the source data (see Section 4.1.1),
which is from the North Sea. It therefore includes risers from FPSOs, TLPs and
semisubmersibles but would not include deepwater technologies such as steel catenary
risers. These are a specialist and relatively new area, and the failure frequency analysis
should accordingly be undertaken utilising suitable expertise.

©OGP 1
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

2.0 Summary of Recommended Data


The recommended frequencies and associated data are presented as follows:
• Table 2.1 Recommended Riser and Pipelines failure Frequencies
• Table 2.2 Recommended Hole Size Distributions for Risers and Pipelines
• Table 2.3 Release Location Distribution for Risers
Note that separate failure frequencies are not given for Segment III, Landfall zone. This
segment, representing the tidal zone, is defined as the area where the pipeline may be
wet and dry at different times. This allows the anode system to function. Onshore
pipelines are often more affected by corrosion than pipelines in the tidal zone. Hence
frequencies for onshore pipelines should be used in tidal zones. A pipeline in the
landfall zone may also be subject to increased risk of external impact, e.g. due to
grounding ships. Such risks may have to be assessed separately.

Table 2.1 Recom m ended Riser and Pipelines failure Frequencies

Pipeline Category Failure Unit


frequency
-4
Subsea pipeline: Well stream pipeline and other 5.0 × 10 per km-year
in open sea small pipelines containing
unprocessed fluid
-5
Processed oil or gas, pipeline 5.1 × 10 per km-year
diameter ≤ 24 inch
-5
Processed oil or gas, pipeline 1.4 × 10 per km-year
diameter > 24 inch
-4
Subsea pipeline: Diameter ≤ 16 inch 7.9 × 10 per year
external loads causing -4
damage in safety zone Diameter > 16 inch 1.9 × 10 per year
-3
Flexible pipelines: All 2.3 × 10 per km-year
subsea
-4
Risers Steel - diameter ≤ 16 inch 9.1 × 10 per year
-4
Steel – diameter > 16 inch 1.2 × 10 per year
-3
Flexible 6.0 × 10 per year
-3
Oil pipelines onshore Diameter < 8 inch 1.0 × 10 per km-year
-4
8 inch ≤ diameter ≤ 14 inch 8.0 × 10 per km-year
-4
16 inch ≤ diameter ≤ 22 inch 1.2 × 10 per km-year
-4
24 inch ≤ diameter ≤ 28 inch 2.5 × 10 per km-year
-4
Diameter > 28 inch 2.5 × 10 per km-year
-4
Gas pipelines onshore Wall thickness ≤ 5 mm 4.0 × 10 per km-year
-4
5 mm < wall thickness ≤ 10 mm 1.7 × 10 per km-year
-5
10 mm < wall thickness ≤ 15 8.1 × 10 per km-year
mm
-5
Wall thickness > 15 mm 4.1 × 10 per km-year

2 ©OGP
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

Table 2.2 Recom m ended Hole Size Distributions for Risers and Pipelines

Hole size Subsea Onshore pipeline Riser


pipeline Gas Oil
Small (< 20 mm) 74% 50% 23% 60%
Medium (20 to 80 mm) 16% 18% 33% 15%
Large (> 80 mm) 2% 18% 15%
25%
Full rupture 8% 14% 29%

Table 2.3 Release Location Distribution for Risers

Release location Distribution


Above water 20%
Splash zone 50%
Subsea 30%

3.0 Guidance on use of data


3.1 General validity
The frequencies given are based on analysis for pipelines conveying hydrocarbons.
They may be applied to pipelines conveying other fluids as discussed in Section 3.4.
There is an implicit assumption that the pipelines are built to a recognized international
standard such as ANSI/ASME B31.4/8 [1,2] or (for subsea pipelines) DNV-OS-F101 [3].

3.2 Uncertainties
In addition to the known causes of fluid release from transport pipelines, as discussed
in Section 4.0, new or unforeseen factors may cause shutdown of pipelines. It is
impossible to estimate the contribution from such incidents to the release frequencies,
neither is it possible to state that it is more likely that some pipelines will sustain failure
before others. Accordingly, unknown factors cannot be used either to identify pipelines
which are especially exposed to the possibility of leakage or to prioritize risk mitigation
measures.

3.3 Application of frequencies to specific pipelines


In Table 2.1, most frequencies are given per km-year as they are dependent on the
length of the pipeline. For a typical pipeline of length ℓ (km) with release frequency fkm,
the release frequency F along the full length of the pipeline is simply given by:
F = ℓ × fkm per year:

There are several causes that can result in the release frequency for a specific pipeline,
or for a section of a pipeline, being different from that obtained simply using the Section
2.0 frequencies.

©OGP 3
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

In general there are two main groups of causes causing pipeline failures. The first
group is related to loads exceeding pipeline critical loads, usually resulting in an
isolated incident. The second group is related to effects gradually weakening the
pipeline over a period of time. Those considered here are:
Isolated incidents – offshore Mechanisms acting over time – offshore
• Loads from trawl boards • Corrosion
• Ship anchor / sinking ship • Open spans causing fatigue
• Subsea landslide • Buckling
Isolated incidents – onshore Mechanisms acting over time – onshore
• External interference e.g. digging • Construction defect
• Hot-tap made by error • Material failure
• Ground movement e.g. landslide • Ground movement e.g. mining
• Corrosion

These are discussed further in Sections 3.3.1 (offshore pipelines) and 3.3.2 (onshore
pipelines), with some guidance given on modifying the Section 2.0 frequencies.
However, in situations where several of these causes pertain or critical decisions are
dependent on the analysis results, a detailed analysis should be carried out utilising
appropriate expertise and data specific to the situation. Such analysis is beyond the
scope of this datasheet.

3.3.1 Offshore pipelines

Where none of the additional causes listed in Section 3.3 that could exacerbate the
likelihood of a release are present, the release frequency can be reduced by 50%.
On pipeline sections where loads from trawl boards pose a threat, it is suggested that
frequencies could be up to a factor of 5 higher (see Section 3.3.1.1).
On pipeline sections where the other causes pose a threat, it is suggested that
frequencies could be up to a factor of 2 higher (see Sections 3.3.1.2 to 3.3.1.5).

3.3.1.1 Loads from trawl boards


Pipelines located in areas where trawling activity takes place may be damaged.
Pipelines are normally dimensioned to withstand loads from a trawl, such as impacts,
overdraw1 or hook up2. The pipe wall is normally covered by a concrete coating giving
protection against local impact loads to the pipeline, and it gives the pipeline the
necessary weight to gain stability.
Overdraw and hook ups can initiate buckling of the pipeline. Free spans will exacerbate
the effect of trawl impacts.
A trawl can also catch other equipments such as exposed flanges and bolts, and a trawl
hook up may cause pipeline fracture on smaller pipelines.

1
Overdraw is a situation where the trawl board comes in under the pipeline and is drawn over
applying force sideways.
2
Hook up is a situation where the trawl board gets stuck beneath the pipeline. The pipeline may
be damaged if the vessel tries to bring in the trawl.

4 ©OGP
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

Trawling with lump weights is a relatively new practice and consequently most pipelines
are not designed to tackle such loads. Even though no serious damage due to lump
weights has yet been registered, it is still uncertain what consequences boom trawl and
lump weights may cause.

3.3.1.2 Ship anchor / impact from sinking ships


Pipelines located in areas with shipping traffic may be damaged by anchors getting hold
of the pipeline, or a sinking ship hitting the line. The relevant factors include shipping
traffic density, distance from shore or port, water depth, vessel traffic surveillance.

3.3.1.3 Material left behind from war years


If a pipeline is laid through coastal areas that were mined during war years, there may
still be material present that poses a threat to the pipeline even if these areas were
cleared before installation of the pipeline.

3.3.1.4 Fatigue (mainly due to free spans)


Free spans can result in fatigue if the span is excited by current, and the pipeline can
fracture relatively quickly. Some spans develop as the soil beneath the pipeline is
washed away, and an already existing span may evolve quickly since the free spans
influence local currents near the pipeline.
Only one example, from China, is known to be caused by free spans. The incident was
caused by extreme climatic conditions (2 following cyclones) and the free span was
longer than what the pipeline was designed for. Vortex Induced Vibration (VIV) has
caused leakages in the past, but today’s pipelines are designed to resist the associated
stress.

3.3.1.5 Buckling
Buckling (bends) may occur if the pipeline is prevented from extension forced by
pressure tension in the axial direction. This can cause buckling sideways or upwards.
Some pipelines are designed to allow for a controlled buckling to relieve axial tension. It
is important that the buckling takes place over a long distance. In extremely
disadvantaged situations, when the buckling is very local, great strain may be placed on
the pipeline. The consequence may be pipeline leakage and subsequent replacement.
Buckling will normally occur during the first years of operation when temperatures are
at their highest, but may occur if operational conditions are changed, new connections
of pipeline or new compressor stations.

3.3.1.6 Material damage/failures


If there are indications of pipelines being especially exposed to a specific type of failure,
then corrections should be made utilising suitable engineering expertise. Typical
correction factors would be in the range 2 to 3, applied to the contribution from the
specific failure mechanism affected; expert engineering judgment should be used to
determine a suitable factor.

©OGP 5
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

3.3.1.7 Fluid medium


Both wet and dry gas should be properly processed to avoid corrosion or keep
corrosion under control. For example, control and monitoring techniques of the
pipelines operated by Norwegian companies is considered to be so good that wet gas
pipelines do not have a higher probability of corrosion than the dry gas pipelines. The
same applies to processed gas. Hence in general no correction need be applied for
fluid medium. However, if it is known that the control techniques in place or planned do
not meet current best practice, then a correction should be made in the same way as
described for material damage/failures (Section 3.3.1.6).

3.3.2 Onshore pipelines


The EGIG and CONCAWE reports [7,8] give breakdowns of release frequencies by cause
and release size. These are partially reproduced in Sections 4.1.2 (gas pipelines) and
4.1.3 (oil pipelines), and further data are available in the EGIG and CONCAWE reports.
These sources of information could be used to obtain more location specific estimates
of the release frequencies. However, in situations where several of these causes pertain
or critical decisions are dependent on the analysis results, a detailed analysis should be
carried out utilising appropriate expertise and data specific to the situation. Such
analysis is beyond the scope of this datasheet.

3.4 Application to pipelines conveying fluids other than hydrocarbons


Certain non hydrocarbon fluids can increase the likelihood of failure through specific
mechanisms. For example, under certain circumstances ammonia may cause stress
corrosion cracking, increasing the contributions from internal and external corrosion.
In the first European Benchmark Study, DNV [5] estimated a factor-of-3 increase in these
contributions to the overall failure frequency. As already discussed in Section 3.3.1, the
factor should be estimated using expert engineering judgment.

4.0 Review of data sources


4.1 Basis of data presented
4.1.1 Risers and offshore pipelines
The frequencies and distributions presented in Section 2.0 for risers and offshore
pipelines are derived from DNV’s re-analysis [6] of the data presented in PARLOC 2001
[4]. The re-analysis was performed because of recognised errors in the frequencies
given in PARLOC 2001 itself.
Table 4.1 presents the data used as the basis of the analysis.
Allocation of failures to failure mechanisms vary according to source. Table 4.2
indicates how much different mechanisms contribute to the overall failure frequency.
This can be used to determine how specific features of the pipeline design may affect
the frequency. Section 3.3 provides some general guidance that is not dependent on
failure mechanism. Expert judgment should be used where the likelihood of failure by a
specific mechanism is affected by specific features of the pipeline design (see Section
3.3.1).

6 ©OGP
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

Table 4.1 Incident and Population Data for Offshore Pipelines from [4]

Pipeline description No. of Exposure time


releases
Well stream pipelines and other
small pipelines containing 60033 km-years
30
unprocessed fluid, diameter ≤ 16 10576 pipe-years
inch
Well stream pipelines and other
36925 km-years
small pipelines containing
3 (pipe-years not
unprocessed fluid, diameter > 16
available)
inch
Processed oil or gas pipeline, 59003 km-years
3
diameter ≤ 24 inch 4320 pipe-years
Processed oil or gas pipeline, 147608 km-years
2
diameter > 24 inch 2949 pipe-years
External load causing pipeline
1 7 8836 years
damage , diameter ≤ 24 inch
External load causing pipeline 2
1 0.7 3734 years
damage , diameter > 24 inch
Steel riser, diameter< 16 inch 10 10979 riser-years
Flexible pipeline 3447 km-years
11
3898 pipe-years
2
Steel riser, diameter > 16 inch 0.7 5937 riser-years
Flexible riser 5 5 riser-years

Notes
1. Applies to near platform zone
2. No releases to date; estimate using standard statistical techniques.

Table 4.2: Allocation of Failure Mechanism s from [4]: Offshore Pipelines,


All Diam eters

Failure mechanism Distribution


Corrosion 36%
Material 13%
External loads causing damage 38%
Construction damage 2%
Other 11%
Note: This is a summary. The distribution varies between
hole sizes. For further information refer to the source
report [4].

Table 4.3: Hole Size Distribution for Offshore Pipelines from [4]

Hole size Number of releases


Pipelines Risers
Small (< 20 mm) 37 9
Medium (20 to 80 mm) 8 2
Large (> 80 mm) 1 4

©OGP 7
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

Full rupture 4
Total 50 15

4.1.2 Onshore gas pipelines


The frequencies presented in Section 2.0 for onshore gas pipelines are based on data
from EGIG’s most recently available report [7]. The EGIG database spans the period
1970-2004; it includes 1123 incidents on pipelines with a total exposure of
approximately 2.77 million km-years. It shows an average incident frequency over this
period of 4.1 × 10-4 per km-year and an average over the period 2000-2004 of 1.7 × 10-4
per km-year.
Table 4.4 reproduces the breakdown of failures by cause given in the EGIG report [7].

Table 4.4: Allocation of Failure Mechanism s from [7]: Onshore Gas


Pipelines, All Diam eters / W all Thicknesses

Failure mechanism Distribution


External interference 49.7%
Construction defect / Material 16.7%
failure
Corrosion 15.1%
Ground movement 7.1%
Hot-tap made in error 4.6%
Other/unknown 6.7%

The report also presents a graph showing the frequencies by cause separately for three
sizes of failure:
• Pinhole/crack: diameter of hole ≤ 20 mm.
• Hole: 20 mm ≤ diameter of hole ≤ pipeline diameter
• Rupture: hole diameter > pipeline diameter

The report presents more detailed frequencies for each of the causes listed above.
Those showing the dependence of the frequencies of failure due to external interference
and corrosion on pipeline wall thickness have been used to derive the frequencies
presented in Section 2.0 for pipelines with a wall thickness up to 15 mm. For thicker
walled pipes, it has been assumed that the frequency is 50% of that for pipelines with a
wall thickness of 10 – 15 mm based on the trend with diameter.
Wall thickness rather than pipeline diameter has been found to be the most significant
factor in determining pipeline failure rates. To some extent it is dependent on diameter,
so accordingly some dependence on diameter is implicit in the data presented.
Based on the rolling 5-year average total frequencies presented in the report, it has
been assumed that current frequencies are approximately 50% of the 1970-2004
average. The frequencies in Section 2.0 include this trend factor.
The report contains more detailed analysis of pipeline failure rate dependencies than is
presented here, addressing:
• External interference: pipeline diameter, depth of cover and wall thickness

8 ©OGP
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

• Construction defect / Material failure: year of construction


• Corrosion: year of construction, type of coating and wall thickness
• Ground movement: pipeline diameter
• Hot-tap made by error: pipeline diameter
• Other / unknown: main causes

For more detailed analysis of these factors, reference should be made to the report
directly.

4.1.3 Onshore oil pipelines


The frequencies presented in Section 2.0 for onshore oil pipelines are based on data in
CONCAWE [8]. The data include 379 failures on pipelines with a total exposure for
pipelines containing crude oil and products of approximately 667,000 km-years. More
detailed analysis has enabled the diameter specific frequencies presented in Section 2.0
to be derived.
The CONCAWE report [8] includes a detailed breakdown of failure size and mechanism,
partially reproduced in Table 4.5.
Based on the definitions of the failure sizes in the CONCAWE report [8], the hole size
distribution given in Table 2.2 has been derived as follows:
• Pinhole + Fissure: Small (diameter of hole ≤ 20 mm.)
• Hole: Medium (20 mm ≤ diameter of hole ≤ 80 mm)
• Split: Large (diameter of hole > 80 mm)
• Rupture: Rupture (pipeline diameter)

Table 4.5: Allocation of Failure Mechanism s from [8]: Onshore Oil


Pipelines, All Diam eters / W all Thicknesses

Failure Distribution
mechanism Pinhole Fissure Hole Split Rupture Overall
1
Total no. of failures 20 21 58 27 50 176
Percentage of total 12% 12% 34% 16% 29% 100%
Mechanical failure 5% 19% 12% 22% 24% 17%
Operational 0% 5% 2% 11% 4% 4%
Corrosion 90% 33% 29% 30% 18% 34%
Natural hazard 0% 5% 2% 11% 2% 3%
Third party 5% 38% 55% 26% 52% 43%
Note 1: Hole size data was only available for 176 out of the 379 failures.

©OGP 9
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

4.2 Other data sources


For risers and offshore pipelines, the PARLOC 2001 data [4] is regarded as the best
source despite the shortcomings in the report noted in Section 4.1.1. It should be
noted, however, that the previous cycle of 2-yearly revisions has lapsed.
Other data sources from which onshore pipeline failure frequency data can be obtained
included:-
1. US Department of Transportation. The US Department of Transportation Office
of Pipeline Safety maintains a database of leaks from hazardous liquid and gas
pipelines, together with exposure data. The database covers 800,000 km of pipelines,
and is the largest of its kind.
An analysis of the gas transmission and gathering line data was prepared for several
years for the American Gas Association (AGA) by Batelle (e.g. Jones & Eiber 1989).
An analysis of liquid pipeline data was prepared for DOT and API by Keifner &
Associates (Keifner et al 1999).
The database itself can be obtained from the DOT website at
ops.dot.gov/libindex.htm. It includes files of pipeline incidents for natural gas
transmission/gathering and distribution lines and liquid lines. Each is split into 1984
to date and pre-1984, due to a change in inclusion criteria. Pipeline population data
is available in separate files for each year for 1995-98 for gas transmission/gathering
and distribution lines. Summary statistics, together with population data for liquid
lines since 1986 are at ops.dot.gov/stats.htm.
2. United Kingdom Onshore Pipeline Operators’ Association (UKOPA).
UKOPA has issued a report (2005) that analyses pipeline product loss incidents in
the UK over the period 1962-2004, covering about 21,700 pipeline km at the end of
2004 and 650,000 km-years pipeline exposure. Products covered are: natural gas
(dry), natural gas liquid, ethane, ethylene, propane, propylene, LPG, butane,
condensate and crude oil (spiked).
Overall incident frequencies are calculated for 5-year periods. For the whole 43-year
period the report presents frequencies by hole size (not related to pipeline diameter),
and by cause and size of leak. There is further breakdown by hole size of the
frequencies for external interference and corrosion as follows:
External interference External corrosion
• Pipeline diameter • Wall thickness class
• Measured wall thickness • Year of construction
• Area classification • External coating type
• Type of backfill
3. UK HSE (1999). This study of the risk from UK gasoline pipelines collected data
on events worldwide involving gasoline leaks from cross country pipelines. The
data were used to determine the likelihood of events such as leaks and fires, and
also to generate consequence models based on the available data. The report
references CONCAWE and US DOT data.
4. UK HSE (2001). This study specifically addresses third party damage to onshore
pipelines, comparing EGIG data and BG Transco’s incident database. The latter
represents nearly 460,000 km-years exposure, with 32 third party incidents, 32 loss
events, and 564 incidents altogether. The third part activity failure model takes into
account such factors as: pipeline diameter, wall thickness and location; depth of
cover; damage prevention measures in place.

10 ©OGP
RADD – Riser & pipeline release frequencies

5.0 Recommended data sources for further information


For further information, the data sources used to develop the release frequencies
presented in Section 2.0 and discussed in Sections 0 and 4.0 should be consulted.
These references are shown in bold in Section 6.0.

6.0 References
6.1 References for Sections 2.0 to 4.0
1. ANSI/ASME B31.4:2006. Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and
other Liquids.
2. ANSI/ASME B31.8:2003. Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems.
3. DNV-OS-F101 2000 amended Oct. 2005. Submarine pipeline systems, Offshore
Standard.
4. PARLOC 2001 – The Update of Loss of Containm ent Data for Offshore
Pipelines, prepared by Mott McDonald for the UK HSE, UKOOA and IP, 2003.
5. DNV 1989. Phase 1 Report, CEC Benchmark Study – Project HH, Independent Risk
Analysis.
6. DNV 2006. Riser/Pipeline Leak Frequencies, Technical Note T7, rev. 02, unpublished
internal document.
7. EGIG 2005. 6 th EGIG-report 1970-2004 Gas Pipeline Incidents, 6 th report of
the European Gas Pipeline Incident Data Group, Doc. No. EGIG
05.R.0002.
8. CONCAW E 2002. Performance of crosscountry oil pipelines in W estern
Europe, Report No. 1/02.

6.2 References for other data sources


(US) Department of Transportation. Refer ops.dot.gov/stats/stats.htm.
((UK) Health and Safety Executive 1999. Assessing the risk from gasoline pipelines in the
United Kigdom based on a review of historical experience, Contract Research Report
210/1999, prepared by WS Atkins Safety & Reliability.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/1999/crr99210.pdf.
(UK) Health and Safety Executive 2001. An assessment of measures in use for gas
pipelines to mitigate against damage caused by third party activity, Contract Research Report
372/2001, prepared by WS Atkins Consultants Ltd.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2001/crr01372.pdf.
UKOPA 2005. Pipeline Product Loss Incidents (1962 - 2004), prepared by Advantica,
Report Ref. R 8099, for UKOPA FDMG. http://www.ukopa.co.uk/.

©OGP 11
 
For further information and publications,
please visit our website at

www.ogp.org.uk
209-215 Blackfriars Road
London SE1 8NL
United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7633 0272
Fax: +44 (0)20 7633 2350

165 Bd du Souverain
4th Floor
B-1160 Brussels, Belgium
Telephone: +32 (0)2 566 9150
Fax: +32 (0)2 566 9159

Internet site: www.ogp.org.uk


e-mail: reception@ogp.org.uk

You might also like