National Academies Press: OpenBook

Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281 (2004)

Chapter:3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning

« Previous: 2 Potential Land Use Approaches to Pipeline Safety and Environmental Management
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

3
Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning

While there is general recognition that pipelines present a potential hazard to people and property, the extent of the danger is not well understood by the public or local officials. Risk is inherent in the system; it can be reduced and managed, but it cannot be eliminated. Thus, it would be helpful to understand the risks well enough to make informed decisions to minimize the likelihood of incidents as well as the consequences of an incident if one does occur. Pipeline companies currently use risk-informed approaches (e.g., integrity management); indeed, they are required to use them.1 However, the approach being used focuses on pipeline-related factors (e.g., pipeline diameter, internal pressure) and not on factors that are external to the pipeline and its operation (e.g., land use in the areas adjacent to the pipeline). Some local governments, at present, have plans to avert or minimize the consequences of natural and industrial disasters (see information from the American Planning Association at www.planning.org); some of these strategies might be used to identify risk management and mitigation strategies for pipelines.

In this chapter some basic issues associated with addressing pipeline safety in terms of risk are considered. A general framework is described that could serve as a basis for understanding, even by those who are not well versed in risk-informed decision making. Further background is available in work by Kaplan and Garrick (1981) and Theofanous (2003).

1

In the mid-1990s, the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) began developing a risk-based approach to managing pipeline risk. The approach focuses on pipeline design and characteristics (e.g., wall thickness, type and material grade of the pipeline, internal pressure, depth of cover), construction (e.g., weld and coating inspections, hydrostatic pressure testing), and maintenance (e.g., in-line inspections) of the system. It does not, however, take into account mitigation measures (e.g., land use measures, setbacks, evacuation procedures) that can also contribute to the integrity of the system and more effectively manage overall risk.

Page 52
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

With a risk-informed approach, it may be possible to identify and prioritize the safety and risk issues related to pipelines and use this information to make informed policy decisions at the federal, state, and local levels. Finally, the importance of risk communication is addressed. Carefully considered risk communication is critical if the risk management process is to be successful. Effective communication can increase the likelihood that the pipeline industry, the public, and other stakeholders can provide informed input into the process and can understand the results, significance, and implications of the analyses.

BACKGROUND

An appropriately designed risk analysis could be used to aid decision makers at all levels in making choices related to pipelines (e.g., siting, burial depth, pipeline diameter, pressurization, easements, land use) and in establishing policies and guidelines to make such choices. To conduct such an analysis, one must identify the various relevant factors,2 obtain and analyze data on the relative safety of these factors, identify the risk measures associated with each, develop a perspective that integrates the components of the pipeline system, and apply a risk management framework. The committee identified the national databases that can be used in conducting a risk assessment of transmission pipelines. (A description of the national databases is contained in Appendix B.) Pipeline operators maintain more detailed data on the pipelines they operate, which would greatly enhance the risk assessment; unfortunately, these data are not available to the public. The national databases are the only data sets that provide usable data at the national level. Even these databases, however, have limitations: they contain information only on incidents that exceed the minimum reporting threshold, they contain data that cannot

2

The committee cannot characterize all the components of a risk assessment for transmission pipelines, but a number of factors might be included. The relevance of each of the components would vary from one location to another. Components of an assessment might include class of pipeline, pipeline diameter, pipeline pressure, commodity in the pipeline, the rate at which the product escapes from the pipeline break (i.e., the geometry of the pipeline break), existence of barriers, extent and type of corrosion, pipeline material, soil conditions, potential for natural hazards (e.g., earthquakes, frost heave), and metal fatigue from transport of the pipe before construction or the cycling of pressures during operation.

Page 53
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

be used to generalize to the entire transmission pipeline system, and they do not include the data categories needed to conduct specific analyses that may be of interest (e.g., a specific type of pipeline transporting a specific product at a specified pressure in a particular soil type). In addition, there are definitional inconsistencies across data sets and across time for the same database, there are problems inherent in the quantity and the quality of the data (e.g., recording errors), data are missing, and the reporting thresholds may result in an inaccurate depiction of the types of transmission pipeline releases and their effects.

Although the national data are incomplete, they are sufficient to begin the risk assessment process and develop risk estimates. Because a risk assessment is iterative in nature, new data that become available should be incorporated into the assessment to provide better information to decision makers at the local level. One of the responsibilities and contributions of OPS is to collect reliable data. A consistent, comprehensive data collection effort would benefit all pipeline safety stakeholders. When the risk assessment is conducted, data needs can be identified, and appropriate efforts to improve the data should be undertaken at that time.

Risk assessments can be done in many ways—some more appropriate than others. (See Appendix D for brief descriptions of a few risk assessment techniques that are used by the pipeline industry. The committee does not endorse or recommend these approaches, but the difference between these techniques and the risk-informed approach that will be described in this chapter should be understood.) A systems approach takes into account the effect (positive or negative) that one component may have on other components in the system. Thus, while one change may reduce the risk for a particular component, it may increase the risk of failure due to another component and thus increase the overall risk (i.e., reduce the safety of the system).

Risk management offers a method of identifying risks, evaluating them on the basis of their likelihood and severity of consequences, and allocating resources to control them on the basis of their importance. This can enable decision makers to identify and evaluate effective and efficient risk mitigation options and to choose options that minimize risk commensurate with their practicality and affordability. After implementation of selected options, system performance can be monitored to

Page 54
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

determine whether risk control measures are effective. This iterative process can, over time, continue to reduce overall risk. The committee believes that such a risk assessment needs to be conducted at the national level. The issue is national in scope, with most transmission pipelines traversing multiple states. In addition, the resources, information, and expertise needed to conduct a credible assessment are of such magnitude that state and local governments may not be able to undertake such an effort on their own.

FRAMEWORK

The principal underlying feature of the concept of risk is uncertainty. Given a system, in this case a pipeline, and its relation to (or position within) the physical world that surrounds it, one can ask what potential events could result in abnormal behaviors. In particular, events that can lead to hazardous situations for life, property, and the environment are of interest.

The only thing that is certain about the future is that it is uncertain. One way of addressing this uncertainty is by means of likelihood. Clearly, the likelihood of the initiating events is of concern, as well as the likelihood of the various potential outcomes that may result from each initiator. The latter is called “conditional” likelihood because the likelihood of the outcome is dependent on the likelihood of the occurrence of the initiating events. Likelihood can be expressed in terms of probability, and the combinations needed to yield the various outcomes can be computed by the use of logic and probability theory.

In principle, by virtue of its being systematic and comprehensive, the risk-informed approach leads to at least a qualitative treatment (and understanding) that should eliminate the possibility of surprise. Thus, at a minimum, preparations can be made to respond to a whole range of potential outcomes. This is the essence of emergency planning.

In addition, the likelihood-consequence results can be pursued quantitatively and used to inform or guide decisions, with the aim of achieving appropriate levels of prevention of such hazardous events and mitigation of their consequences. This is the essence of risk management. Appropriately conducted and implemented, risk management ensures that,

Page 55
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

on the average, optimal expenditures will be made to reduce or mitigate hazards, or both. “On the average” is important to understand because uncertainty, however small, cannot be dealt with in terms of a single outcome, or even a small number of outcomes. In particular, there is no guarantee that a very low-probability event will not occur tomorrow.

In practice, ideal performance is often not achieved because of the difficulty in creating the input probabilities (of initiating events) to be used in the analysis. An even larger problem is finding a common value system to measure costs and losses to optimize risk management measures. In this common value system, the perpetrator (initiator) of risk, the recipient of risk, and government must all be considered in order to define and implement a regulatory structure. Although each factor cannot be precisely quantified, a way to incorporate them into the analysis is needed.

WHAT IS RISK?

A picture of the system and its surroundings, ranging from densely built and populated areas to rural, unincorporated areas, can be developed. The following questions are asked (see Figure 3-1): What can go wrong

FIGURE 3-1 What is risk?

Page 56
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

(scenarios)? What could be the results (consequences)? What are the respective likelihoods (probabilities)? The answers to these three questions provide a set of triplets; this is the risk.

The scenarios can be categorized as externally imposed (man-made) events, naturally occurring phenomena, and internal events (arising from influences and effects from normal operation of the system that can result in abnormal disturbances). The principal example of externally imposed events (and indeed the principal cause of pipeline failures) is human/machine intrusion (e.g., excavation, outside force). Earthquakes and floods are among the key natural phenomena because both can cause ground shifting and large-scale displacements. The major internal events include generation of defects due to corrosion/erosion and fatigue due to fluctuating pressure or temperature conditions. A separate category of potential external events recently has come to the forefront as a result of international terrorism.

In a pipeline, an initiating event is one that leads to failure of the pressure boundary, and a scenario is the specification of the failure mode and magnitude, together with all other factors that can be independently specified (e.g., location, weather, population and building distributions, environmental setting). A comprehensive risk assessment, which would identify a wide range of scenarios, would include existing and plausible future pipeline uses. Among the scenarios that should be included is a conversion of pipeline use from crude to refined petroleum products, which carry different ignition factors and spread rates for terrestrial and water movement. Another is rights-of-way that carry more than one operating pipeline (e.g., a natural gas and a refined petroleum pipeline operating simultaneously in the same right-of-way; such an arrangement would modify the risks and the spatial extent of the hazard because one pipeline failure could cause another).

The consequences are the physical/chemical/biological phenomena that follow as a natural result of the scenario. The principal distinctions and classes thereof include flammable gases, volatile flammable liquids, toxic gases, volatile toxic liquids, and environmental polluting liquids. Of course, pipeline size (diameter), pressure, and pressure control methods also are relevant because they affect quantities and rates of release. The weather determines the rate of atmospheric dispersal and the direction

Page 57
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

and size of any resulting cloud. Ignition sources define potential delays involved. In general, in the absence of strong ignition sources, the occurrence of ignition may be unpredictable.

Depending on the gas involved, flames can accelerate into explosions and perhaps even powerful detonations. Flammable liquids can burn from pools or from sprays. The consequence of fire may be a direct burn hazard to the population exposed or an indirect burn hazard through thermal radiation. Fires can propagate to nearby flammable structures and buildings. Explosions can result in health hazards and even death, depending on the magnitude of the overpressure involved and on structural failure.

All these effects are a function of the distance from the location of pipeline failure, and therefore they can be mitigated (e.g., by appropriate exclusion zones and setbacks). The approach of an exclusion zone, for example, is used to manage risks from nuclear power plants. A similar approach was developed by the National Fire Protection Association [NFPA 59A: Standard for the Production, Storage, and Handling of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)] to manage risks from large LNG storage tanks. An independent layer of safety is gained by requiring mitigation of consequences that result from assumed major failures (probability of failure is equal to 1), in addition to reducing the likelihood of major facility failures (prevention). For rare, high-consequence hazards, experience shows that such an approach is appropriate, and it is known as “defense in depth.”

Naturally, a major question for the committee’s task is whether such an approach (assuming, conservatively, the maximum possible failure) is appropriate here, or, if not, whether and how likelihood should be used to define various degrees of protection around pipelines.

STRUCTURING A DECISION

A decision to do nothing is still a decision. Thus, avoidance of action because of an inability to measure uncertainty cannot be considered a sound approach to managing risk. Furthermore, a misapplication of risk analysis that could produce misleading results must be avoided. A deliberative process is needed that is well documented, and the process

Page 58
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

should include effective communication among and involvement of all stakeholders. The starting point of such a process is illustrated in Figure 3-2. The net private benefits axis is a net gain that incorporates the income from operating the pipeline as well as expenses of operation, including maintenance and accident prevention measures (inspection, maintenance of rights-of-way, etc.). The net public benefits axis includes community gains (e.g., new jobs) as well as losses due to restricted land use. The fear factor is intangible, yet it needs to be taken into consideration because pipeline safety involves local governments and millions of individuals, all with different levels of comprehension of the technical issues involved. Clearly, additional considerations (axes) may be involved.

Each point on this space represents a particular decision (for example, the setback for a particular pipeline) and is associated with a certain level of risk—the triplet defined above (i.e., scenarios, consequences, probabilities). A first step in structuring a decision process—that is, in choosing a neighborhood within this space that represents an optimally managed risk space—is to determine the various boundaries on each of

FIGURE 3-2 Structuring a decision.

Page 59
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

the axes that define the limits of acceptable regions. For example, one could try to define on the net public benefits axis the limit of consequences that would be deemed unacceptable, however small the possibility of initiating failure. Similarly, from an initial scoping study for various pipelines and scenarios, one could try to define a limit on the fear factor that would be considered prohibitive. The problems encountered in seeking permission to transport spent nuclear fuel to a geologic repository demonstrate the relevance of this factor in a political setting in which such decisions are made.

In assessing likelihood, a fundamental issue is the metric to be used. For example, the probability of failure per unit length of pipeline or volume transported in a pipeline is very low, and safety measured in this way exceeds, by far, that of all other modes. However, for the pipeline system as a whole, there are about 300 accidents per year, which is not negligible, especially from the point of view of those who are adversely affected.

One approach may be to use a hierarchy that is based on the magnitude of potential consequences. At the upper end of the range of consequences, practices could be consistent with those for LNG storage tanks and other chemical plant facilities, and at the lower end more effort could be placed on prevention through inspection and monitoring programs, such as those already in place (e.g., Common Ground Alliance one-call systems).

Incidentally, the common practice of obtaining a measure of risk by multiplying probabilities and consequences is, in general, not adequate. One reason for the preference for the triplet (see Figure 3-1) is that a risk number alone does not distinguish a high-consequence, low-probability event from a low-consequence, high-probability event. In contrast, applying the scenario-likelihood-consequence approach provides all the key ingredients about risk necessary to inform decisions. For example, the loss of 10 lives (consequence) every 100 years (probability) is not the same as the loss of 100 lives every 1,000 years, even though in both cases the product of the two factors gives one-tenth of a life per year. Another reason is that the triplet definition is amenable to conveying levels of confidence in such estimates. These are also crucial, especially when multiple interests are involved, as is the case here. For example, a probability estimate that is expressed with a 90 percent confidence is certainly more

Page 60
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

reliable (it means that such an estimate would turn out to be correct for 90 percent of the time histories to which it pertains) than one expressed as a “best estimate” value. A 90 percent estimate is said to be conservative, and of course a 99 percent estimate is even more conservative.

Ultimately, judgment also has to come into play to balance value systems and conflicting forces. Again, all this requires sound technical work and a deliberate, consultative process with ample input from representative stakeholders, as discussed below in the section on risk communication.

PROBABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY

The role of logic and probability theory mentioned above is in decomposing complex, hard-to-characterize events into simpler events, to the degree deemed appropriate. This aspect of risk assessment is well founded and well developed, especially for pipeline risks, because those risks do not significantly involve complexity. “Complexity” refers to emergent system behavior—that is, behavior that is not a combination of the individually characterized behaviors of the system’s presumed (superficially identifiable) parts. Thus, the success of pipeline risk assessment rests on defining the probabilities of component parts, and to a major extent this means the probabilities of initiating events.

For physical events, these probabilities can be defined with reasonable acceptability. For external events, empirical evidence is available that appears to be stable over many years and thus is acceptable for use in such assessments. Only the terrorism threat presents an intangible factor that has to be taken into account, perhaps at the upper end of the hierarchy mentioned above. The situation for internal events is mixed in that pipelines at different stages of their lifetime, under different conditions and maintenance and inspection procedures, present different kinds of challenges. Perhaps a hierarchical approach is needed here too, from well-characterized and hence more predictable cases to those so ill-defined that almost nothing can be said about them with any degree of certainty.

A robust treatment must distinguish between random and knowledge-type uncertainty (see Figure 3-3) and must express the confidence

Page 61
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

FIGURE 3-3 Probability and uncertainty.

levels on estimates of failure probabilities accordingly. Random uncertainty is empirical (based on data) and therefore is amenable to statistical analysis. Still, care needs to be exercised in applying the results to a particular pipeline; it needs to belong to the same statistical class as the pipelines from which the data were derived. The assignment of the pipeline to a statistical class is problematic because it can only convey the expert’s opinion on the matter assessed. Wide review and deliberation are then necessary to avoid the pitfalls that the opinions of any one individual might entail.

TOWARD A PROCESS FOR RISK-INFORMED GUIDANCE

Local governments are increasingly faced with issues of land use. The availability of an easy-to-apply means for making decisions, in a manner that allows flexibility in accepting the level of risk deemed appropriate in a particular case, would be beneficial. This is possible if the decision process is structured in a risk framework as outlined above.

Most local governments have neither the resources nor the expertise to engage in developing such a structure on their own. Moreover, this approach appears inappropriate because it would involve much duplicative work done by necessity at a superficial level. Instead, a risk-informed

Page 62
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

effort is needed at the national level that results in an appropriate abstraction easily understood and used at the local government level. The necessary steps are shown in Figure 3-4. Much of the success of such an effort depends on the competence of the team engaged in the study (past performance should be a key factor in selecting the team and organizing the effort) and adherence to an open, deliberative, peer-reviewed process that iterates freely between risk assessments and decision structuring. Furthermore, the process should be open to updates and refinements as needed. Properly conducted, such an effort naturally leads to an optimal mix of prevention and mitigation measures, and this mix may be different for each class of pipelines (see Figure 3-5).

Proposed Process

The committee believes that OPS should initiate a process, perhaps by designating an organization to convene the appropriate stakeholders, that would develop risk-informed guidance. The development of this guidance would require the commissioning of qualified and experienced analysts. In consultation with the stakeholders, the analysts would develop a methodology for a risk assessment that would—after incorporating peer review—lead to technical guidance and then a prototype set of risk guidance. The committee believes that data and methods, perhaps drawn in part from techniques described in Appendix D, are available

FIGURE 3-4 Toward a framework for risk-informed guidance.

Page 63
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

FIGURE 3-5 Triplet definition.

for developing a set of risk estimates, which will only be approximations and will entail considerable uncertainty. The prototype guidance would be beta tested by users to determine their applicability and appropriateness. Refinements would be made on the basis of the beta testing. The stakeholder group would then share the results with federal, state, and local officials for implementation as they deem appropriate. Research would be commissioned by government and industry to improve on the initial version. Over time, the stakeholder group would refine the guidance on the basis of feedback from users and new technical information.

Example of Guidance

The technical guidance the committee envisions might take the form of recommended practices that would allow state and local governments to select a setback, building code specification, or other mitigation strategy that could be applied to manage development and activities near a transmission pipeline. The choices would be based on the communities’ decisions about an appropriate level of risk and an acceptable cost burden for both the pipeline companies and the communities. For example, the risk assessment for setbacks might be based on calculations of expected risk

Page 64
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

at various distances from transmission pipelines, which would vary by product type, pressurization, and so forth. The guidance would include procedures that could be applied to estimate the cost burden at various distances, which would significantly depend on the nature of the built environment.

RISK COMMUNICATION

There are many stakeholders in the pipeline system who should be knowledgeable about the risks so that informed guidance can be provided. However, the subject is technical and often complex, which can lead to misunderstanding, confusion, and distrust (NRC 1989). Thus, effective risk communication, which is an interactive process of timely and credible information and opinion exchange (NRC 2003) that is used to raise the level of understanding of relevant issues and actions, is difficult. Society increasingly expects government and industry to provide new levels of protection from industrial hazards. In particular, the public increasingly demands that corporations do more than merely comply with safety regulations. And industry is realizing that it has an incentive to go beyond regulatory compliance to prevent even larger costs from litigation settlements and legal transactions and the damage to reputation and market share when bad things happen.

Risk information would allow public officials to make informed decisions about how to mediate between pipeline companies and the public, and it would allow the public to participate and feel comfortable in accepting such decisions. How this information is communicated will affect siting of new pipelines, planning for capacity expansion, development of property next to pipelines, precautions during excavation near pipelines, real estate values and assessments, and public acceptance of pipelines.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

A systems approach to risk management that uses quantifiable mitigation measures (such as setbacks, warning signs, and alarm and evacuation procedures) and prevention measures (such as design, inspection,

Page 65
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×

and maintenance of pipelines) would likely improve pipeline safety across the nation. The committee suggests that now is an appropriate time to pursue such an approach. It suggests that the methodology should involve the following principal components, as well as a tight interaction and integration between them:

  • A high-quality risk assessment, conducted at the national level, that acknowledges the various classes of pipelines and respective classes of risk profiles in a manner that encompasses the variety of conditions that exist in the field;

  • Reduction and generalization of these results into simple and easy-to-use decision-guiding tools with regard to risk levels associated with various extents of setbacks, rights-of-way, and procedures involved in maintenance, inspections, and mitigation in emergencies;

  • A management plan for implementation that renders help to local communities according to need and builds on the experience gained from use of the approach in the field;

  • A management plan for long-term communication of risk and interplay of perceptions among all stakeholders, especially pipeline operators, local officials, and the public; and

  • A management plan for integrating all the preceding components and refining them on a continuing basis by using actual experience, both in implementation and in the safety records obtained.

REFERENCES

Abbreviation

NRC National Research Council

Kaplan, S., and B. J. Garrick. 1981. On the Quantitative Definition of Risk. Risk Analysis, Vol. 1, pp. 11-27.

NRC. 1989. Improving Risk Communication. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

NRC. 2003. Alerting America: Effective Risk Communication—Summary of a Forum, October 31, 2002. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Theofanous, T. G. 2003. Risk Assessment and Management. In Comprehensive Structural Integrity (I. Milne, R. O. Ritchie, and B. Karihaloo, eds.), Vol. 1, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Chapter 10.

Page 51
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"3 Approach for Risk-Informed Guidance in Land Use Planning." Transportation Research Board. 2004. Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11046.
×
Page65
Next: 4 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations »
Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach -- Special Report 281 Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB Special Report 281: Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach calls upon the U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of Pipeline Safety in the Research and Special Programs Administration to work with stakeholders in developing risk-informed land use guidance for use by policy makers, planners, local officials, and the public.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!