The EA Reporting Hub is a secure, digital platform that guides pipeline operators through the Engineering Assessment (EA) process in compliance with CSA Z662. It automates data retrieval, streamlines data entry, and triggers the preparation of ready to submit EA Reports. The publication of the completed EA Report is transmitted in PDF format to the customer within 2 working days of Order Confirmation. The customer will be Invoiced for the order following deliver of the final EA Report(s) included on the Order.

The TPA – Engineering Assessment (EA) Reporting Hub is an end-to-end digital workflow that streamlines the creation of engineering reports for pipeline reactivation, discontinuation, or integrity validation. The process begins with Form 1, where users enter their contact and company information. In Form 2 - Pipeline Selection, the user defines the pipeline to be assessed by providing the Province, License Number, and Line Number. Upon submission of Form 2, a Power Automate workflow is triggered, which connects directly to the TRIAGE / AbaData risk model database via an API connection—retrieving pipeline metadata, corrosion risk factors, and integrity performance scores. Next, the user completes Form 3, which defines the Scope-of-Work. This includes confirming the selected pipeline, specifying the EA Report type (e.g., Routine Reactivation, Discontinuation, etc.), and entering or verifying technical data such as diameter, material, status, MAOP, protection type, CP history, and inspection results. The collected data is used to support risk modeling and inform regulatory compliance. Finally, Form 4 captures Order Confirmation and initiates the report generation process. Using the pipeline inputs and TRIAGE risk outputs, a TPA - EA Report / ChatGPT Language Model generates a preliminary EA Report that includes an internal/external corrosion assessment, mitigation plan, regulatory compliance review (e.g., CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2), and a suitability-for-service statement. The report is made available in a Canvas interface for review and finalization by TPA. Upon review and approval, TPA publishes the final EA Report in PDF format and transmits the report within two workdays following Order Confirmation. Following publication of the final EA Report, TPA will submit an Invoice as per the details provided within the Form 4 - Order Confirmation.

Here is a concise description to guide users of the TPA / Engineering Assessment (EA) Reporting Hub in determining the type of EA Report they need: 1. Routine Pipeline Reactivation Applies to pipelines that were discontinued in compliance with regulations and are being returned to service with minimal modifications. Typically involves a review of historical integrity, compliance with regulatory requirements, and confirmation of operational readiness. 2. Non-Routine Pipeline Reactivation Required when a pipeline has unique challenges, such as prolonged discontinuation, potential integrity concerns, or regulatory non-compliance. Includes detailed assessments of pipeline condition, historical performance, and additional mitigation strategies to ensure safe reactivation. 3. Integrity Assessment / License Transfer Conducted when a pipeline is being transferred to a new license holder or undergoing an integrity verification process. Focuses on evaluating past operational history, failure records, corrosion risks, and mitigation strategies to ensure compliance and reliability before transfer or continued use. This description helps users quickly identify the appropriate EA Report based on their pipeline's status and regulatory requirements.

Regulatory & CSA Z662 Compliance Summary Trusted Pipeline Advisor (TPA) Engineering Assessment (EA) Reports are developed to meet or exceed the requirements outlined in: CSA Z662: Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems AER Directive 056 – Pipeline integrity requirements for reactivation, discontinuation, and abandonment AER Directive 077 – Requirements for pipeline performance and integrity evaluation Applicable jurisdictional expectations (AER, CER, BCER, etc.) TPA - EA Reports are: Fully structured in alignment with CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2 Built to satisfy AER’s submission expectations Designed for transparency, traceability, and regulatory defensibility

Regulatory & CSA Z662 Compliance Summary Trusted Pipeline Advisor (TPA) Engineering Assessment (EA) Reports are developed to meet or exceed the requirements outlined in: CSA Z662: Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems AER Directive 056 – Pipeline integrity requirements for reactivation, discontinuation, and abandonment AER Directive 077 – Requirements for pipeline performance and integrity evaluation Applicable jurisdictional expectations (AER, CER, BCER, etc.) 1. Engineering Assessment (EA) Purpose and Scope CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.1 & 10.3.2 require that EA reports justify the suitability of a pipeline for continued or new service. TPA EA Reports clearly define why the report is needed (e.g., non-routine reactivation), what pipeline is under review, and what decisions the report will inform. 2. Pipeline Description & Operating History TPA reports provide full design details, historical service, shutdown events, and operational pressures in alignment with CSA Z662 Clause 4.14 and AER Directive 056 reporting obligations. 3. Corrosion Risk Assessments Reports include detailed internal and external corrosion risk classification based on: Fluid chemistry Flow dynamics Environment Historical mitigation These are directly aligned with CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2 (b, c, e). 4. Historical Integrity & Inspection Records Reports include a review of pigging, cleaning, ILI, CP performance, and inspection history, addressing CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2(f). TPA’s integration with TRIAGE data enables strong evidence-based analysis. 5. Integrity Verification Planning Recommendations comply with CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2(g): When hydrotests are not feasible, alternatives like in-service leak testing with enhanced leak detection are proposed and justified. 6. Environmental Risk & Consequence Analysis TPA includes consequence scoring and cost estimation consistent with industry norms and CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2(i), particularly for environmentally sensitive areas. 7. Recommendations & Risk Mitigation Comprehensive risk-based mitigation strategies are proposed including: Chemical inhibition Enhanced CP evaluation Visual/NDE inspections Cleaning programs These follow the intent of CSA Z662 Clause 10.3.2(j) and AER integrity management expectations. 8. Professional Sign-Off Each EA report includes a placeholder for final review and authentication by a licensed Professional Engineer (P.Eng.), per CSA Z662 Clause 3.1.2 and regulatory engineering accountability requirements.

The QIC Assess (quantitative internal corrosion) hazard profiling service, offered by Trusted Pipeline Advisor (TPA), is an industry-leading internal corrosion hazard profiling solution designed to enhance pipeline integrity management. It serves as the foundation for developing hazard-optimized mitigation strategies, ensuring safe and reliable pipeline operations. Key Features of QIC Assess: - Comprehensive Corrosion Profiling: Utilizes advanced hydraulic modeling tools, such as PIPESIM and OLGA-S, to simulate pipeline conditions and identify potential corrosion hotspots. This approach allows for precise mapping of flow dynamics, enabling targeted mitigation strategies. - Customized Corrosion Management Plans (CMP-IC): Develops tailored plans that address specific corrosion risks identified during the profiling process. These plans have been proven to eliminate failures in high-frequency production regions, achieving a 45-60% reduction in direct integrity management costs. - Versatile Application Across Pipeline Types: Applicable to various pipeline systems, including production gathering, wet-gas midstream, non-conforming sales gas, NGL/crude oil, and refined products. QIC Assess identifies and addresses internal corrosion activities associated with episodes of fugitive biomass, debris, sludge ingress, and other contaminants from upstream storage and pumping facilities. - Proactive Risk Management: Empowers field operations teams to recognize emerging corrosion hazards and implement appropriate mitigation strategies before they escalate into significant issues. This proactive approach aligns with corporate Safety Management Systems, enhancing overall pipeline safety and reliability. By integrating QIC Assess into their integrity management programs, pipeline operators can transition from reactive to proactive corrosion management, resulting in improved safety, reduced costs, and extended pipeline lifespan.

The QIC Assess / Corrosion Management Plan (CMP-IC) is specifically designed to empower Field Operations teams by giving them clear visibility into when, where, and why internal corrosion risks are likely to occur — well before issues arise in the field. ✅ Here's how it makes teams proactive: 1. Hazard-Focused Intelligence, Not Just Data QIC Assess transforms raw pipeline data into actionable insights through advanced flow modeling and chemical profiling. Teams get a focused understanding of **specific corrosion mechanisms** active in each segment — not just generalized risk levels. 2. Time-Linked Risk Forecasting By simulating how production conditions change over time (e.g., flow rates, water cuts, temperature), QIC Assess forecasts **where corrosion risk will increase and what operational scenarios will trigger it — enabling mitigation before degradation starts. 3. Targeted Mitigation Recommendations CMP-IC delivers hazard-specific mitigation strategies (e.g., biocide slugging, pigging intervals, water management) tied directly to modeled corrosion triggers. This ensures field interventions are based on science, not guesswork. 4. Visualization of Risk Zones The report includes GIS-style visuals and annotated line diagrams showing risk zones and recommended action points. Field techs and operations engineers can see at a glance where to focus attention. 5. Workflow-Ready Integration CMP-IC reports are structured to align with your internal work planning systems (e.g., SAP PM, Maximo, Excel trackers), allowing for easy transfer of tasks into maintenance plans or digital inspection rounds. 6. Proactive Communication Tool It gives corrosion engineers a common language and evidence base to engage operations, inspection, and leadership teams — making hazard discussions collaborative, not confrontational. Bottom Line: CMP-IC equips field ops with a map, a calendar, and a playbook — so they’re always ahead of the hazard curve, instead of reacting to the aftermath of a failure.

QIC Assess isn’t just an inspection — it’s predictive intelligence. While traditional corrosion assessments (like ILI, coupons, or probes) look backward at where corrosion has occurred, QIC Assess looks forward. It combines hydraulic modeling with production data to identify where internal corrosion risks are likely to emerge — before they cause problems. What sets QIC Assess apart: Flow & chemical modeling to simulate pipeline conditions in detail. Identification of specific corrosion mechanisms (not just generic risk). Customized mitigation recommendations via the CMP-IC report. Visual, field-friendly outputs: maps, timelines, action checklists. QIC Assess is a forward-looking hazard profiling tool that surpasses traditional internal corrosion assessments by integrating flow modeling, chemical behavior simulation, and mechanism-based diagnostics into a unified analysis. Rather than relying solely on field measurements (e.g., pigging residue, coupons, or ILI), QIC Assess reconstructs the hydraulic and chemical environment inside a pipeline, then simulates corrosion triggers under both steady-state and transient flow regimes. The system uses inputs such as water cut, gas/oil ratios, emulsion stability, and slug frequency to forecast: Liquid hold-up and water dropout zones Microbial risk conditions (e.g., under-deposit MIC environments) Erosional velocity exceedance locations Pigging sweep efficiency and inhibitor carry-through limitations This methodology enables operators to shift from reactive mitigation (post-failure or post-inspection) to predictive management, where corrosion hotspots are identified and addressed before degradation becomes irreversible. Bottom line: Proactive insights instead of reactive responses.You can edit the title from the FAQ 'Settings' tab in the Editor. To remove the title from your mobile app go to the 'Site & App' tab in your Owner's app and customize.

We work with what you have. A complete QIC Assess typically uses: Pipeline geometry: route, diameter, elevation profile Operating conditions: pressures, temperatures, flow rates Production chemistry: water-cut, solids / debris, emulsion characteristics Asset history: pigging records, chemical usage, previous failures Facility connections: tanks, separators, pumps, meters QIC Assess works with a wide range of operational and design data. The more detailed the dataset, the higher the resolution and accuracy of the corrosion hazard profile. Key inputs include: Pipeline geometry (length, diameter, wall thickness, material, elevation profile) Facility layout and tie-in information (separators, tanks, pumps, etc.) Production fluid characteristics: water cut, sand content, emulsion behavior, specific gravity Operating conditions: pressure, temperature, flow rate (base and max), pigging frequency Chemical treatment history (type, injection points, batch vs. continuous) In cases of missing or incomplete data, engineering assumptions based on regional analogs or conservative industry guidelines are applied. This ensures the evaluation can proceed even when full instrumentation or inspection records are unavailable.

Typical turnaround: 7 - 10-days The timeframe depends on the complexity of the system and data availability. Simpler systems with accessible data can be completed quickly. Complex systems with multiple segments or incomplete data may take longer. We also offer expedited delivery if required.

Yes — and this is where QIC Assess often provides the most value. Older systems often lack full inspection records or modern monitoring tools. QIC Assess can reconstruct flow profiles and corrosion scenarios based on: Historical production trends Engineering assumptions Known operating practices This allows asset teams to close knowledge gaps and make informed risk-based decisions for legacy infrastructure.

QIC Assess aligns with key regulatory expectations for internal corrosion control. Both CSA Z662 and API 1160 emphasize the need for: Hazard identification and classification Mechanism-based threat assessments Mitigation plans tied to specific operational conditions QIC Assess delivers all of the above in a structured format that supports audits, risk management programs, and continuous improvement. QIC Assess provides full alignment with Section 3 and Annex C of CSA Z662, as well as the risk-based methodology outlined in API 1160. Specifically: It identifies credible corrosion mechanisms by location and mode of occurrence Quantifies likelihood of failure by integrating flow, chemistry, and geometry Outlines site-specific mitigation plans that address root cause, not just symptoms Supports defensible engineering judgments used in EA submissions and mitigation deferral plans Reports generated through QIC Assess include detailed narrative, technical figures, and mitigation matrices structured to align with regulator expectations.

Only what’s needed, exactly where it’s needed. CMP-IC recommendations are custom-designed for each pipeline segment, and may include: Targeted biocide or corrosion inhibitor programs Changes to water management or fluid handling Adjusted pigging frequency or pig type selection Equipment or process modifications (e.g., coalescers, separators) CMP-IC (Corrosion Management Plan – Internal Corrosion) delivers targeted mitigation strategies that are tightly linked to modeled hazard mechanisms and pipeline flow conditions. These recommendations go beyond generic practices and are tied to specific risk factors such as fluid loading, stagnation, water holdup, or microbial activity. Typical mitigation recommendations include: Pigging frequency optimization: Based on modeled fluid velocities, liquid dropout zones, and known cleaning inefficiencies. Targeted chemical treatment: Including batch biocides, continuous inhibitors, or emulsion breakers, selected based on expected phase behavior and interaction with contaminants. Facility-side changes: Such as pump speed adjustments, separator residence time corrections, or bypass management to reduce upstream slugging or surge effects. Monitoring and verification recommendations: Including coupon placement, corrosion probe prioritization, and water sampling frequency — each informed by modeled flow regimes. Each recommendation is presented in a location-specific and time-linked manner, with justification based on flow modeling and historical performance analogs.

Yes. QIC Assess is built for practical field and engineering use. All deliverables can be aligned with your: Integrity Management System (IMS) Risk registers and mitigation tracking sheets SAP PM or Maximo maintenance task entries GIS tools and mapping layers Excel-based asset databases Our team can provide output in formats that match your workflows.

Most clients re-assess annually or after operational changes. You should consider a re-evaluation: After new tie-ins or facility upgrades If flow rates, production chemistry, or pressure profiles change Following a corrosion failure or near-miss As part of an annual integrity program cycle This ensures your mitigation strategies always reflect current risk conditions.

It’s effective across gas, liquid, and multiphase systems. QIC Assess is versatile and has been successfully applied to: Wet gas pipelines with condensate dropout risks Crude oil pipelines with water slugging NGL and multiphase production lines Sales gas pipelines with glycol or trace water carryover Corrosion risks in gas systems often go unnoticed until failure. QIC Assess provides much-needed foresight.

Typical results include lower OPEX, reduced failures, and fewer unnecessary digs. Benefits include: 45–60% reduction in direct integrity management costs Extension of pipeline asset life Elimination of internal corrosion failures in high-risk systems Reduced chemical spend through targeted application Improved planning and prioritization of inspection and maintenance It’s not just about cost savings — it’s about certainty, safety, and operational excellence.

TRIAGE is designed to provide pipeline-specific clarity, offering granular, line-by-line evaluation rather than broad-stroke, generalized scoring. This approach reflects a fundamental understanding that each pipeline segment may have vastly different upstream inputs, flow conditions, environmental exposures, and failure mechanisms — even within a single asset area. TRIAGE’s pipeline connectivity model dynamically links each segment to its contributing UWIs and facilities, reconstructing real-world flow behavior and corrosion exposure. This architecture enables: Accurate risk scoring per license and line number Identification of high-risk outliers within otherwise low-risk regions Validation of tie-ins, loops, and line misalignments Detection of flow anomalies across system boundaries and ownership changes Evaluation of risk for shared infrastructure (e.g., multi-company gathering systems) Instead of assessing pipelines by field or facility, TRIAGE ensures that each pipeline record is evaluated independently using the most current operational and regulatory data. This means high-risk pipelines are no longer hidden by regional averaging — they are surfaced with precision, allowing proactive mitigation efforts to be laser-focused.

Yes — TRIAGE offers the industry’s first dual-mode failure model for non-metallic systems, accounting for both polymer degradation and metallic riser vulnerabilities in a terrain-aware framework. TRIAGE recognizes that non-metallic pipelines are increasingly common in production systems but bring unique failure modes not captured in traditional metallic scoring tools. The platform evaluates the structural integrity of composite pipe materials by considering: Mechanical strain from thermal expansion and contraction Flexural fatigue due to undulating terrain or improper trenching Degradation from UV exposure and chemical compatibility issues Risers — often the metallic weak point in a non-metallic system — are independently assessed for: Susceptibility to under-insulation corrosion Stress intensification due to bending and elevation change Poor drainage and slug accumulation during flow stagnation By treating non-metallic systems as structurally and environmentally dynamic, TRIAGE provides risk insight that accounts for both the pipe and the interfaces — essential for managing aging composite infrastructure in aggressive service conditions.

Yes — TRIAGE incorporates a rigorous data override and calibration process that integrates field-verified inspection results directly into the risk model. Operators can import: ILI wall loss or deformation results to update corrosion likelihood Coupon corrosion rates as representative regional values Direct examination dig reports to validate threat classification or residual wall thickness When these data sources are available, they serve as calibration anchors within TRIAGE. Rather than overwriting the model, they enable dynamic adjustment and validation of predictive scoring. This hybrid approach supports both broad-scale predictive risk analysis and line-specific inspection interpretation. Advanced operators can also apply trending analysis across historical ILI runs to assess corrosion growth rates and compare them with TRIAGE model forecasts. The result is a unified picture of pipeline condition — one that connects past inspection insight to current and future risk.

TRIAGE uses a proprietary network topology engine to validate hydraulic continuity, identify flow mismatches, and flag disconnected or misrepresented pipeline records. Key anomaly detection capabilities include: Detection of “orphan” pipelines with no upstream or downstream tie-in Identification of production volume imbalances between connected UWIs and pipeline capacity Flagging of conflicting tie-ins (e.g., same UWI feeding multiple incompatible directions) Loop detection and side-stream analysis where flow routing may create bypassed or stagnant zones Visual summaries and integrity reports highlight these issues clearly, enabling engineering and GIS teams to review suspect records and update master datasets. This contributes to data integrity and ensures that risk scores reflect real-world flow behavior — not legacy system artifacts or administrative assumptions.

aTRIAGE delivers both scheduled and event-driven risk updates, ensuring that integrity decisions are made with the most current available data. Risk updates occur on a monthly basis, driven by automated ingestion of: Production volumes and fluid composition from public UWI records Cathodic protection (CP) performance changes Inspection and mitigation program records Environmental and land use data updates (e.g., new water crossings or road expansions) In addition, operators can request on-demand updates in response to: Operational changes such as flow rate increases, shut-ins, or facility tie-ins New inspection results (ILI, digs, coupon campaigns) Emergency scenarios requiring rapid prioritization of high-risk assets TRIAGE also supports API-based integration, allowing real-time or batch data input from operator systems to trigger automated recalculations. This makes the platform ideal not only for annual integrity planning but also for live field operations and tactical decision-making.

RIAGE by AbaData is a purpose-built risk intelligence platform that elevates pipeline integrity from a reactive process to a predictive, forward-looking strategy. Unlike traditional models that rely on periodic inspections or simple heuristic scoring, TRIAGE harnesses over 15 years of industry development to deliver a risk assessment engine built on historical performance data, real-time operational inputs, and predictive analytics. It assesses pipelines individually based on connectivity, operational history, and environmental context to detect both overt and hidden failure modes before they manifest. By incorporating upstream UWI behavior, fluid composition, network connectivity, and failure pattern recognition, TRIAGE offers actionable insights into where and why future corrosion, mechanical degradation, or geohazards are likely to occur. Operators are empowered with visualized risk maps, prioritized mitigation guidance, and the ability to forecast the impact of flow changes, facility tie-ins, or system disruptions in real-time. This positions teams to make informed decisions before risk becomes reality.

TRIAGE applies a dual-axis scoring model, using a standardized 5x5 matrix to evaluate both the likelihood and the consequence of failure across multiple threat types. Likelihood is assessed through proprietary algorithms informed by industry-standard models (e.g., NORSOK, NACE - deWaard and Milliams) and enhanced with machine learning to identify pattern associations. These models consider: Internal corrosion drivers: water-film transport, stagnation zones, plunger-lift behavior External corrosion risks: CP system performance, soil corrosivity, coating age Geotechnical threats: terrain slope, historical landslide zones, and soil instability Non-metallic pipeline failure likelihood based on mechanical configuration and stress Consequence modeling incorporates spill volume prediction, environmental sensitivity (e.g., waterbody proximity and soil permeability), infrastructure intersection (e.g., powerlines, railways), and population exposure. The result is a robust, transparent classification framework that allows operators to understand risk in full context and take regionally appropriate, hazard-specific action.

Yes — TRIAGE specifically targets the unique internal corrosion risks posed by low-flow and plunger-lift operations, which are known contributors to failure in the WCSB. TRIAGE analyzes water dropout zones, stagnant fluid pockets, and restart surge dynamics common to plunger-lift and timer-controlled wells. It evaluates the frequency and severity of on-off-on flow cycles, quantifying the risk of biomass mobilization, debris re-entrainment, and fluid slugs damaging the pipe wall upon reactivation. The system uses UWI production histories, operational pressure and rate logs, and event frequency analysis to build a full picture of corrosion exposure. TRIAGE’s water-film transport model helps define the spatial and temporal risk associated with intermittent operations — providing an evidence-based platform for refining chemical mitigation and pigging schedules.

TRIAGE sets the benchmark for public data integration, incorporating regulatory, geospatial, geological, and environmental datasets to strengthen every facet of risk classification. Key data sources include: Public UWI production and injection records Historical AER/BCER pipeline failure records Topographic and slope stability maps Soil conductivity and corrosion potential indices Surface infrastructure maps (rail, road, power, water crossings) These data streams inform both the likelihood and consequence components of TRIAGE’s scoring engine. For instance, external corrosion assessments consider cathodic protection exposure by correlating CP records with pipeline age, soil saturation, and coating defect years. Consequence assessments incorporate hydrocarbon migration potential, leak detection method, and proximity to sensitive receptors. This multi-layered data fusion results in precision risk scores aligned with actual operating and environmental conditions.

TRIAGE delivers comprehensive reports that bridge engineering diagnostics with field-executable action plans, enabling seamless integration of risk strategy into daily operations. Each pipeline report includes unmitigated and mitigated risk rankings, failure mode-specific diagnostics (e.g., internal corrosion vs. geotechnical), and prioritized recommendations tailored to field realities. These reports include: Segment-specific corrosion mechanisms Suggested chemical programs and frequencies Pigging program optimization Inspection, verification, and discontinuation guidelines Reports are designed for line-by-line field reviews, enabling field teams and asset integrity groups to record comments, implement actions, and validate mitigation strategies. Combined with Field OPS by AbaData, TRIAGE supports full lifecycle planning — from risk identification through execution and continuous improvement.