Panel Peer Review of PHMSA Pipeline Safety Research Projects: 2014

R&D Menu


The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) Pipeline Safety Research and Development (R&D) Program has held annual structured peer reviews of active research projects since 2006 in accordance with mandates by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST) to maintain research data quality. PHMSA holds these reviews virtually via teleconference and the Internet, saving time and resources. This execution is also working well with panelists, researchers, Agreement Officers’ Technical Representatives, and project co-sponsors. Most impressively, the PHMSA approach facilitates attendance from all U.S. time zones, Canada, and Europe.

The annual 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 2014 peer review panel consisted of two retired and three active independent technical consultants and one academic representative.

Twenty-four research projects were peer reviewed by expert panelists using 13 evaluation criteria. These criteria were grouped within the following five evaluation categories:

  1. Project relevance to the PHMSA mission.
  2. Project management.
  3. Approach taken for transferring results to end users.
  4. Project coordination with other closely related programs.
  5. Quality of project results.

The rating scale possibilities were “Ineffective,” “Effective,” “More than Effective” or “Very Effective.” During the May 2014 review, the average program rating between all the evaluation categories was “More than Effective.” For this year, 13 projects were rated “Very Effective” with 11 projects ranked as “More than Effective.” The average sub-criteria scoring were also rated very high and underpin these findings. The majority of peered projects and the overall program rating is down to “More than Effective” from the 2013 rating of “Very Effective.” Weakness in project management contributed to the lower program average. The government shutdown in CY 2013 was identified as a contributor to lower rating for project management.

Rating Scale
Very Effective4.5 to 5.0 (13 Projects)
More than Effective3.0 to 4.4 (11 Projects)
Effective1.9 to 2.9 (0 Projects)
Ineffective0.0 to 1.8 (0 Projects)
Average Program Score4.4

Program Averages - Review Categories and Sub-Criteria
Review Categories and Sub-Criteria Score Rating
1. Project relevance to PHMSA mission. 4.7 Very Effective
  1.1. How well does the project illustrate its relevance to enhancing pipeline safety and or with protecting the environment? 4.7 Very Effective
  1.2. How well does the project describe its relevance to PHMSA's research program goals? 4.7 Very Effective
2. Project Management. 4.3 More than Effective
  2.1. How well is the project being managed (on budget and schedule)? 4.2 More than Effective
  2.2. How well is the project making progress toward the work scope objectives? 4.4 More than Effective
3. Approach taken for transferring results to end users. 4.4 More than Effective
  3.1. Is there a plan for dissemination of results, including publications, and reporting? 4.4 More than Effective
  3.2. How much end user involvement is incorporated into the work scope? 4.4 More than Effective
  3.3. For results that may include marketable products and technologies, are commercialization or U.S. Patent plans established? 4.4 More than Effective
4. Project coordination with other related programs. 4.2 More than Effective
  4.1. Does the project build on, or make use of, related or prior work? 4.5 Very Effective
  4.2. Is the work of the project being communicated to other related research efforts? 4.0 More than Effective
  4.3. Has consideration been given to possible future work? 4.2 More than Effective
5. Quality of project results. 4.5 Very Effective
  5.1. Are the intended results supported by the work performed during the project? 4.5 Very Effective
  5.2. Are the intended results consistent with scientific knowledge and/or engineering principles? 4.5 Very Effective
  5.3. Are the intended results presented in such a manner as to be useful for identified end users? 4.3 More than Effective
Average Category Score and Rating: 4.4 Very Effective

Project Rankings
Project Rank Contract Project Title Score Rating
499 1 DTPH56-13-T-000010 Development of an Industry Test Facility and Qualification Processes for Inline Inspection (ILI) Technology Evaluation and Enhancements 4.8 Very Effective
497 2 DTPH56-13-T-000007 EMAT Sensor for Small Diameter and Unpiggable Pipe 4.7 Very Effective
354 3 DTPH56-10-T-000009 Meandering Winding Magnetometer Array Characterization of Mechanical Damage and Corrosion 4.6 Very Effective
390 3 DTPH56-11-T-000003L Comprehensive Study to Understand Longitudinal Electric Resistance Welded (ERW) Seam Failures 4.6 Very Effective
494 3 DTPH56-13-T-000004 Advanced Leak Detection LiDAR 4.6 Very Effective
495 3 DTPH56-13-T-000005L Advanced Development and Technology Transfer of a Methane/Natural Gas Microsensor 4.6 Very Effective
496 3 DTPH56-13-T-000006 Development, Field Testing and Commercialization of a Crack and Mechanical Damage Sensor for Unpiggable Natural Gas Transmission Pipelines 4.6 Very Effective
498 3 DTPH56-13-T-000009L Improve and Develop ILI Tools to Locate, Size, and Quantify Complex/Interacting Metal Loss Features 4.6 Very Effective
492 4 DTPH56-13-T-000003 INO Technologies Assessment of Leak Detection Systems for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines 4.5 Very Effective
493 4 DTPH56-13-T-000002 Real-Time Multiple Utility Detection During Pipe Installation Using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) System 4.5 Very Effective
503 4 DTPH56-13-T-000008L In-Ditch Validation Methodology for Determination of Defect Sizing 4.5 Very Effective
554 4 DTPH56-14-H-00001 Effects of Hydrocarbon Permeation on Plastic Pipe Strength and Fusion Performance 4.5 Very Effective
559 4 DTPH56-14-H-00006 Repair/Replacement Considerations for Pre-Regulation Pipe 4.5 Very Effective
490 5 DTPH56-13-T-000001 Subsurface Multi-Utility Asset Location Tool 4.4 More than Effective
558 5 DTPH56-14-H-00005 Threat/Anomaly Mitigation Decision-Making Process 4.4 More than Effective
500 6 DTPH56-13-T-000011L Above-ground Detection Tools Including Disbondment and Metal Loss for all Metals Including Cast-Iron Graphitization 4.3 More than Effective
501 6 DTPH56-13-T-000012 Evaluation of Structural Liners for the Rehabilitation of Liquid and Natural Gas Piping Systems 4.3 More than Effective
557 6 DTPH56-14-H-00004 Improving Models to Consider Complex Loadings, Operational Considerations, and Interactive Threats 4.3 More than Effective
555 7 DTPH56-14-H-00002L Consolidated Project Full Scale Testing of Interactive Features for Improved Models 4.2 More than Effective
556 7 DTPH56-14-H-00003L Strain-Based Design and Assessment of Segments of Pipelines with and without Fittings 4.2 More than Effective
560 7 DTPH56-14-H-00007 Improving Leak Detection System Design Redundancy & Accuracy 4.2 More than Effective
502 8 DTPH56-13-T-000013 Technology Transfer, Demonstrations and Post-Mortem Testing of Cast Iron and Steel Pipe Lined with Cured-in-Place Pipe Liners 4.1 More than Effective
561 9 DTPH56-14-H-00008L Definition of Geotechnical and Operational Load Effects on Pipeline Anomalies 4.0 More than Effective
504 10 DTPH56-13-T-000014 Improving Quality Management Systems (QMS) for Pipeline Construction Activities 3.8 More than Effective