ASME PTB-9:2014 pdf free download

ASME PTB-9:2014 pdf free download.ASME Pipeline Standards Compendium.
Pertormance measures should be selected caretülly to ensure that they are reasonable program electiveness indicators. Change shall be monitored so the measures will remain etTective over time as the plan matures. The time required to obtain sufticient data for analysis shall also be considered when selecting pcrfbrmance measurcs. Methods shall be implemented to permit both short- and long-term performance measure evaluations. Integrity management program performance measures can generally be categorized into groups.
Proccor Acthitv Measures. (H3t.NS-92.l)
Process or activity measures can be used to evaluate prevention or mitigation activities. These measures determine how well an operator is implcnwnting various elements of the integrity management program. Measures relating to process or activity shall be selected carefully to permit performance evaluation within a realistic time frame.
Operational Measures. (B31.SS – 92.2)
Operational measures include operational and maintenance trends that measure how well the system is responding to ihe integrity management program. An example of such a measure might be the changes in corrosion rates due to the implementation of a more effective cathodic protection (CP) program. The number of third-party pipeline hits after the implementation of prevention activities, such as improving the excavation notification process within the system. is another example.
Direct lnteitv Measures. (B3IJIS .9.2.3)
Direct integrity measures include leaks, ruptures. injuries, and fatalities. In addition to the above categories. performance measures can also he categorized as leading measures or lagging measures. Lagging measures are reactive in thai they provide an indication of past integrity management program performance. Leading measures are proactive: they provide an indication of how the plan may be expected to perform. Several examples of performance measures classified as described are illustrated in Figure 2-3.
2.6.3.2.1.3 Performance .1easuremeni tethodolog (B31.SS -9.3)
An operator can evaluate a system’s integrity management program performance within their own system and also by comparison with other systems on an industry-wide basis.
2.6.3.2.1.4 Performance Measurement: I ntrasv stem (B3 I .SS – 9.4)
(a) Performance metrics shall be selected and applied on a periodic basis for the evaluation of both prescriptive- and performance-based integrity management programs. Such metrics shall be suitable for evaluation of local and threat-specific conditions, and for evaluation of overall integrity manage mnent program performance.
(b) For operators implementing prescriptive programs, performance measurement shall include all of the threat-specifie metrics for each threat in Subsection 2.6.5.4.2 (see Figure 2-4). Additionally, the following overall program measurements shall be determined and documented.