Section 192.917 - How does an operator identify potential threats to pipeline integrity and use the threat identification in its integrity program?(a)Threat identification. An operator must identify and evaluate all potential threats to each covered pipeline segment. Potential threats that an operator must consider include, but are not limited to, the threats listed in ASME B31.8S (incorporated by reference, see§ 192.7 ), section 2, which are grouped under the following four threat categories: (1) Time dependent threats such as internal corrosion, external corrosion, and stress corrosion cracking;(2) Stable threats, such as manufacturing, welding, fabrication, or construction defects;(3) Time independent threats, such as third party damage, mechanical damage, incorrect operational procedure, weather related and outside force damage, to include consideration of seismicity, geology, and soil stability of the area; and(4) Human error, such as operational or maintenance mishaps, or design and construction mistakes.(b)Data gathering and integration. To identify and evaluate the potential threats to a covered pipeline segment, an operator must gather and integrate existing data and information on the entire pipeline that could be relevant to the covered segment. In performing data gathering and integration, an operator must follow the requirements in ASME B31.8S, section 4. (1) Integrate pertinent information about pipeline attributes to ensure safe operation and pipeline integrity, including information derived from operations and maintenance activities required under this part, and other relevant information, including, but not limited to: (i) Pipe diameter, wall thickness, seam type, and joint factor;(ii) Manufacturer and manufacturing date, including manufacturing data and records;(iii) Material properties including, but not limited to, grade, specified minimum yield strength (SMYS), and ultimate tensile strength;(iv) Equipment properties;(v) Year of installation;(vii) Joining method, including process and inspection results;(ix) Crossings, casings (including if shorted), and locations of foreign line crossings and nearby high voltage power lines;(x) Hydrostatic or other pressure test history, including test pressures and test leaks or failures, failure causes, and repairs;(xi) Pipe coating methods (both manufactured and field applied), including the method or process used to apply girth weld coating, inspection reports, and coating repairs;(xiii) Construction inspection reports, including but not limited to: (A) Post backfill coating surveys; and(B) Coating inspection ("jeeping" or "holiday inspection") reports;(xiv) Cathodic protection installed, including, but not limited to, type and location;(xviii) Normal maximum and minimum operating pressures, including maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP);(xx) Leak and failure history, including any in-service ruptures or leaks from incident reports, abnormal operations, safety-related conditions (both reported and unreported) and failure investigations required by § 192.617 , and their identified causes and consequences;(xxii) Cathodic protection (CP) system performance;(xxiii) Pipe wall temperature;(xxiv) Pipe operational and maintenance inspection reports, including, but not limited to: (A) Data gathered through integrity assessments required under this part, including, but not limited to, in-line inspections, pressure tests, direct assessments, guided wave ultrasonic testing, or other methods;(B) Close interval survey (CIS) and electrical survey results;(C) CP rectifier readings;(D) CP test point survey readings and locations;(E) Alternating current, direct current, and foreign structure interference surveys;(F) Pipe coating surveys, including surveys to detect coating damage, disbonded coatings, or other conditions that compromise the effectiveness of corrosion protection, including, but not limited to, direct current voltage gradient or alternating current voltage gradient inspections;(G) Results of examinations of exposed portions of buried pipelines (e.g., pipe and pipe coating condition, see§ 192.459 ), including the results of any non-destructive examinations of the pipe, seam, or girth weld (i.e. bell hole inspections);(H) Stress corrosion cracking excavations and findings;(I) Selective seam weld corrosion excavations and findings;(J) Any indication of seam cracking; and(K) Gas stream sampling and internal corrosion monitoring results, including cleaning pig sampling results;(xxv) External and internal corrosion monitoring;(xxvi) Operating pressure history and pressure fluctuations, including an analysis of effects of pressure cycling and instances of exceeding MAOP by any amount;(xxvii) Performance of regulators, relief valves, pressure control devices, or any other device to control or limit operating pressure to less than MAOP;(xxxii) Audits and reviews;(xxxiii) Industry experience for incident, leak, and failure history;(xxxiv) Aerial photography; and(xxxv) Exposure to natural forces in the area of the pipeline, including seismicity, geology, and soil stability of the area.(2) Use validated information and data as inputs, to the maximum extent practicable. If input is obtained from subject matter experts (SME), an operator must employ adequate control measures to ensure consistency and accuracy of information. Control measures may include training of SMEs or the use of outside technical experts (independent expert reviews) to assess the quality of processes and the judgment of SMEs. An operator must document the names and qualifications of the individuals who approve SME inputs used in the current risk assessment.(3) Identify and analyze spatial relationships among anomalous information (e.g., corrosion coincident with foreign line crossings or evidence of pipeline damage where overhead imaging shows evidence of encroachment).(4) Analyze the data for interrelationships among pipeline integrity threats, including combinations of applicable risk factors that increase the likelihood of incidents or increase the potential consequences of incidents.(c)Risk assessment. An operator must conduct a risk assessment that follows ASME B31.8S, section 5, and that analyzes the identified threats and potential consequences of an incident for each covered segment. An operator must ensure the validity of the methods used to conduct the risk assessment considering the incident, leak, and failure history of the pipeline segments and other historical information. Such a validation must ensure the risk assessment methods produce a risk characterization that is consistent with the operator's and industry experience, including evaluations of the cause of past incidents, as determined by root cause analysis or other equivalent means, and include sensitivity analysis of the factors used to characterize both the likelihood of loss of pipeline integrity and consequences of the postulated loss of pipeline integrity. An operator must use the risk assessment to determine additional preventive and mitigative measures needed for each covered segment in accordance with § 192.935 and periodically evaluate the integrity of each covered pipeline segment in accordance with § 192.937 . Beginning February 26, 2024, the risk assessment must:(1) Analyze how a potential failure could affect high consequence areas;(2) Analyze the likelihood of failure due to each individual threat and each unique combination of threats that interact or simultaneously contribute to risk at a common location;(3) Account for, and compensate for, uncertainties in the model and the data used in the risk assessment; and(4) Evaluate the potential risk reduction associated with candidate risk reduction activities, such as preventive and mitigative measures, and reduced anomaly remediation and assessment intervals.(5) In conjunction with § 192.917(b) , an operator may request an extension of up to 1 year for the requirements of this paragraph by submitting a notification to PHMSA at least 90 days before February 26, 2024, in accordance with § 192.18 . The notification must include a reasonable and technically justified basis, an up-to-date plan for completing all actions required by this paragraph (c)(5), the reason for the requested extension, current safety or mitigation status of the pipeline segment, the proposed completion date, and any needed temporary safety measures to mitigate the impact on safety.(d)Plastic transmission pipeline. An operator of a plastic transmission pipeline must assess the threats to each covered segment using the information in sections 4 and 5 of ASME B31.8S and consider any threats unique to the integrity of plastic pipe, such as poor joint fusion practices, pipe with poor slow crack growth (SCG) resistance, brittle pipe, circumferential cracking, hydrocarbon softening of the pipe, internal and external loads, longitudinal or lateral loads, proximity to elevated heat sources, and point loading.(e)Actions to address particular threats. If an operator identifies any of the following threats, the operator must take the following actions to address the threat. (1)Third party damage. An operator must utilize the data integration required in paragraph (b) of this section and ASME B31.8S, Appendix A-8 to determine the susceptibility of each covered segment to the threat of third party damage. If an operator identifies the threat of third party damage, the operator must implement comprehensive additional preventive measures in accordance with § 192.935 and monitor the effectiveness of the preventive measures. If, in conducting a baseline assessment under § 192.921 , or a reassessment under § 192.937 , an operator uses an internal inspection tool or external corrosion direct assessment, the operator must integrate data from these assessments with data related to any encroachment or foreign line crossing on the covered segment, to define where potential indications of third party damage may exist in the covered segment. An operator must also have procedures in its integrity management program addressing actions it will take to respond to findings from this data integration.(2)Cyclic fatigue. An operator must analyze and account for whether cyclic fatigue or other loading conditions (including ground movement, and suspension bridge condition) could lead to a failure of a deformation, including a dent or gouge, crack, or other defect in the covered segment. The analysis must assume the presence of threats in the covered segment that could be exacerbated by cyclic fatigue. An operator must use the results from the analysis together with the criteria used to determine the significance of the threat(s) to the covered segment to prioritize the integrity baseline assessment or reassessment. Failure stress pressure and crack growth analysis of cracks and crack-like defects must be conducted in accordance with § 192.712 . An operator must monitor operating pressure cycles and periodically, but at least every 7 calendar years, with intervals not to exceed 90 months, determine if the cyclic fatigue analysis remains valid or if the cyclic fatigue analysis must be revised based on changes to operating pressure cycles or other loading conditions.(3)Manufacturing and construction defects. An operator must analyze the covered segment to determine and account for the risk of failure from manufacturing and construction defects (including seam defects) in the covered segment. The analysis must account for the results of prior assessments on the covered segment. An operator may consider manufacturing and construction related defects to be stable defects only if the covered segment has been subjected to hydrostatic pressure testing satisfying the criteria of subpart J of at least 1.25 times MAOP, and the covered segment has not experienced a reportable incident attributed to a manufacturing or construction defect since the date of the most recent subpart J pressure test. If any of the following changes occur in the covered segment, an operator must prioritize the covered segment as a high-risk segment for the baseline assessment or a subsequent reassessment. (i) The pipeline segment has experienced a reportable incident, as defined in § 191.3 , since its most recent successful subpart J pressure test, due to an original manufacturing-related defect, or a construction-, installation-, or fabrication-related defect;(iii) The stresses leading to cyclic fatigue increase.(4)Electric Resistance Welded (ERW) pipe. If a covered pipeline segment contains low frequency ERW pipe, lap welded pipe, pipe with longitudinal joint factor less than 1.0 as defined in § 192.113 , or other pipe that satisfies the conditions specified in ASME B31.8S, Appendices A-5.3 and A-5.4, and any covered or non-covered segment in the pipeline system with such pipe has experienced seam failure (including seam cracking and selective seam weld corrosion), or operating pressure on the covered segment has increased over the maximum operating pressure experienced during the preceding 5 years (including abnormal operation as defined in § 192.605(c) ), or MAOP has been increased, an operator must select an assessment technology or technologies with a proven application capable of assessing seam integrity and seam corrosion anomalies. The operator must prioritize the covered segment as a high-risk segment for the baseline assessment or a subsequent reassessment. Pipe with seam cracks must be evaluated using fracture mechanics modeling for failure stress pressures and cyclic fatigue crack growth analysis to estimate the remaining life of the pipe in accordance with § 192.712 .(5)Corrosion. If an operator identifies corrosion on a covered pipeline segment that could adversely affect the integrity of the line (conditions specified in § 192.933 ), the operator must evaluate and remediate, as necessary, all pipeline segments (both covered and non-covered) with similar material coating and environmental characteristics. An operator must establish a schedule for evaluating and remediating, as necessary, the similar segments that is consistent with the operator's established operating and maintenance procedures under part 192 for testing and repair.(6)Cracks. If an operator identifies any crack or crack-like defect (e.g., stress corrosion cracking or other environmentally assisted cracking, seam defects, selective seam weld corrosion, girth weld cracks, hook cracks, and fatigue cracks) on a covered pipeline segment that could adversely affect the integrity of the pipeline, the operator must evaluate, and remediate, as necessary, all pipeline segments (both covered and non-covered) with similar characteristics associated with the crack or crack-like defect. Similar characteristics may include operating and maintenance histories, material properties, and environmental characteristics. An operator must establish a schedule for evaluating, and remediating, as necessary, the similar pipeline segments that is consistent with the operator's established operating and maintenance procedures under this part for testing and repair.68 FR 69817, Dec. 15, 2003, as amended by Amdt. 192-95, 69 FR 18231, Apr. 6, 2004; Amdt. 192-125, 84 FR 52253, Oct. 1, 2019; Amdt. 192-132, 87 FR 52273, Aug. 24, 2022 84 FR 52253, 7/1/2020; 87 FR 52273, 5/24/2023; 89 FR 33282, 6/28/2024