Panel Peer Review of PHMSA Pipeline Safety Research Projects: 2008
R&D Menu
The peer review continues to build on an already strong and systematic evaluation process developed by PHMSA’s Pipeline Safety R&D Program and certified by the Government Accountability Office. The peer review panel consisted of nine government and industry experts. Four of the nine panelists are active government representatives from the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Minerals Management Service. The remaining five panelists are retired government and industry personnel who have active roles as peers for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE), and other standards developing organizations. Twenty-nine active research projects were peer reviewed by expert panelists using 21 evaluation criteria. These criteria were grouped within the following six evaluation categories:
- Is the project still relevant to the PHMSA mission?
- Is the project well designed?
- Is the project still well managed?
- What is the approach taken for transferring results to end users?
- Is the project well coordinated with other closely related programs?
- Is the project producing high quality results?
The rating scale possibilities were "Ineffective," "Moderately Effective," "Effective," or "Very Effective." During the May 2008 review, the average program rating was “Very Effective” for each of the above six evaluation categories. Twenty-eight projects were rated “Very Effective,” with only one project rating “Effective.” All sub-criteria scoring was rated “Very Effective.” Additional details are available in Section 7, Tables 4 and 5 of the report.
| Very Effective | 3.9 to 5.0 (28 Projects) |
| Effective | 2.6 to 3.8 (1 Project) |
| Moderately Effective | 1.3 to 2.5 (0 Projects) |
| Ineffective | 0.0 to 1.2 (0 Projects) |
| Average Program Score | 4.562 |
| Review Categories and Sub-Criteria | Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Is the project still relevant to the PHMSA mission? | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 1.1. Is the project still relevant for enhancing pipeline safety or protecting the environment? | 4.8 | Very Effective |
| 1.2. Does the project support rulemaking, statutory requirements, inspection activities, or stakeholder recommendations? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 1.3. Does the project address a technology gap, and consensus standard or general knowledge? | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 2. Is the project well designed? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 2.1. Does the project have clear objectives? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 2.2. Does the project have clear milestones? | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 2.3. Are the deliverables well defined? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 2.4. Are the capabilities of the project team appropriate to the work? | 4.8 | Very Effective |
| 2.5. Has the project a well designed plan for transferring results to end users? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 3. Is the project still well managed? | 4.4 | Very Effective |
| 3.1. Does the project have an up-to-date work plan? | 4.4 | Very Effective |
| 3.2. Is the project making progress toward the scope and the PHMSA goals? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 3.3. Is the project being managed on budget and schedule? | 4.2 | Very Effective |
| 4. What is the approach taken for transferring results to end users? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 4.1. How much end user involvement is incorporated into the work scope? | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 4.2. Have efforts been made to protect the intellectual property in a manner that allows for the greatest public impact? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 4.3. For results that may include marketable products and technologies are commercialization plans established? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 5. Is the project well coordinated with other closely related programs? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 5.1. Does the project build on, or make use of, related or prior work? | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 5.2. Has consideration been given to possible future work? | 4.3 | Very Effective |
| 5.3. Is the project coordinated with related projects or programs in PHMSA, industry, or other government agencies? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 6. Is the project producing high quality results? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 6.1. Are the intended results supported by the work performed during the project? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 6.2. Are the intended results consistent with scientific knowledge and/or engineering principles? | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 6.3. Are the intended results appropriate for the resources expended? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 6.4. Are the intended results presented in such a manner as to be useful for identified end users? | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| Average Category Score and Rating: | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| Project | Rank | Contract | Project Title | Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 187 | 1 | DTPH56-06-T-000002 | Define, Optimize and Validate Detection and Sizing Capabilities of Phased-Array Ultrasonics to Inspect Electrofusion Joints in Polyethylene Pipes | 4.9 | Very Effective |
| 195 | 1 | DTPH56-06-T-000001 | Demonstration of ECDA Applicability and Reliability for Demanding Situations | 4.9 | Very Effective |
| 202 | 1 | DTPH56-06-T-000015 | Pipeline Integrity Management for Ground Movement Hazards | 4.9 | Very Effective |
| 207 | 1 | DTPH56-06-T-000019 | Augmenting MFL Tools with Sensors That Assess Coating Condition | 4.9 | Very Effective |
| 211 | 1 | DTPH56-06-T-000020 | Phase Sensitive Methods to Detect Cathodic Disbondment | 4.9 | Very Effective |
| 208 | 2 | DTPH56-06-T-000017 | Improved In-field Welding and Coating Protocols | 4.8 | Very Effective |
| 218 | 2 | DTPH56-07-T-000002 | Advanced Technologies and Methodology for Automated Ultrasonic Testing Systems Quantification | 4.8 | Very Effective |
| 171 | 3 | DTPH56-05-T-0003 | Corrosion Assessment Guidance for Higher Strength Pipelines | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 188 | 3 | DTPH56-06-T-000003 | Characterization of Stress Corrosion Cracking Using Laser Ultrasonics | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 200 | 3 | DTPH56-06-T-000014 | Validation and Documentation of Tensile Strain Limit Design Models for Pipelines | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 204 | 3 | DTPH56-06-T-000016 | Investigate Fundamentals and Performance Improvements of Current In-Line Inspection Technologies for Mechanical Damage Detection | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 226 | 3 | DTPH56-07-T-000005 | Development of Optimized Welding Solutions for X100 Linepipe Steel | 4.7 | Very Effective |
| 176 | 4 | DTPH56-05-T-0001 | Understanding Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) Signals from Mechanical Damage in Pipelines | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 199 | 4 | DTPH56-06-T-000013 | Guidelines for the Identification of SCC Sites and the Estimation of Re-Inspection Intervals for SCCDA | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 201 | 4 | DTPH56-06-T-000014 | Second Generation Models for Strain-Based Design | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 225 | 4 | DTPH56-07-T-000005 | Update of Weld Design, Testing, and Assessment Procedures for High Strength Pipelines | 4.6 | Very Effective |
| 194 | 5 | DTPH56-06-T-000004 | Plastic Pipe Failure, Risk, and Threat Analysis | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 203 | 5 | DTPH56-06-T-000016 | Development of Dual Field MFL Inspection Technology to Detect Mechanical Damage | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 216 | 5 | DTPH56-07-T-000004 | Development of HAZ Hardness Limits for In-Service Welding | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 219 | 5 | DTPH56-07-T-000003 | Hybrid Laser/GMAW of High Strength Steel Gas Transmission Pipelines | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 221 | 5 | DTPH56-07-T-000010 | Butt Fusion Joint Integrity and Evaluation of NDE Technologies | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 224 | 5 | DTPH56-07-T-000009 | In-Situ Hydrogen Analysis in Weldments: Novel NDE for Weld Inspection | 4.5 | Very Effective |
| 222 | 6 | DTPH56-07-T-000007 | Hybrid Laser Arc Welding (HLAW) System Development for Pipeline Construction | 4.4 | More than Effective |
| 210 | 7 | DTPH56-06-T-000021 | Method for Qualification of Coatings Applied to Wet Surfaces | 4.3 | More than Effective |
| 217 | 7 | DTPH56-07-T-000001 | Improving Joint Integrity and Assessment for Non-Metallic Materials | 4.3 | More than Effective |
| 220 | 7 | DTPH56-07-T-000006 | Validation of Assessment Methods for Production Scale Girth Welding of High Strength Pipelines with Multiple Pipe Sources | 4.3 | More than Effective |
| 206 | 8 | DTPH56-06-T-000022 | External Pipeline Coating Integrity | 4.2 | More than Effective |
| 212 | 9 | DTPH56-06-T-000023 | Effect of Surface Preparation on Residual Stress in Multi-layer and Other Pipeline Coatings | 4.0 | More than Effective |
| 223 | 10 | DTPH56-07-T-000008 | Automated Laser Ultrasonic Testing (ALUT) Of Hybrid Laser Arc Welds For Pipeline Construction | 3.8 | More than Effective |