Transitioning from complexity to clarity: Quantifying facility risk for strategic advantage

The hidden vulnerability in your pipeline network

Although pipelines and facilities are subject to comprehensive integrity programs and regulatory requirements, facility risk models often do not include the same level of sophistication as traditional line pipe risk analysis.  Less sophisticated risk models provide fewer user insights..

Recent industry events show that pipeline inspection and remediation programs generally have more structured budgets and planning than those for facilities.  However, facility-related failures often lead to higher costs from unplanned downtime, condensed proximity of facility piping and equipment, and proximity to elevated population areas, sometimes exceeding pipeline maintenance expenses by a factor of three to five.

This disconnect exists because traditional facility integrity management program (FIMP) approaches rely heavily on risk-based inspection programs, which only cover inspectable threats. FIMP approaches also leverage reactive maintenance programs, non-descript risk results, or basic criticality matrices, the latter two of which simply help inform reinspection intervals for the risk-based inspection programs. These methods, while providing some value, fail to capture the true risk exposure with consistency across operations or provide actionable intelligence for resource allocation.

The Cost of Uncertainty vs. The Value of Holistic Insight

Unlike the relatively static nature of buried pipe, facilities house complex mechanical assets and equipment where numerous components interact under demanding and changing conditions. Without comprehensive enterprise asset risk assessment and replacement strategies, some assets receive excessive resources while others fail to receive appropriate attention. The financial impact can be substantial, especially when dealing with high-value equipment, where even a 1% improvement in maintenance efficiency can translate to significant OPEX and CAPEX savings.

Synergi Pipeline's risk methodology provides a clear and consistent framework for evaluating asset risks. By using digitized station data and modeling equipment-specific risk factors, this approach enables integrity engineers to:

• Quantify financial risk exposure and consequences for each asset
• Conduct what-if analyses for various maintenance strategies
• Create data-driven justifications for resource allocation
• Shift from reactive to preventive maintenance approaches
• Support incorporating integrity operating windows into likelihood of failure and time to failure estimates when operational data is available

Protecting critical facility assets

Synergi Pipeline software facilitates quantitative risk assessment for facility assets in a scalable manner, capitalizing on data digitalization within modern pipeline operating infrastructures.

• Failure probabilities calculated from all applicable threat mechanisms specific to facility equipment
• Consequence engines evaluating asset-specific factors, including operational criticality
• Direct integration with existing data sources and GIS
• Identification of risk hotspots across your network
• Configurable reports that translate technical risk into business terms
• Risk modelling methodology that is supported by decades of DNV's global incident analysis expertise

"When integrity engineers can quantify risk in financial terms, they gain powerful ammunition for budget justifications," explains Alex Woll, Pipeline Risk Head of Section at DNV. "We've seen clients improve capital allocation efficiency by identifying less expensive, more targeted interventions that deliver better protection at lower cost."

“White Box” models that engineers understand and trust

As a DNV solution, Synergi Pipeline's risk models incorporate decades of industry knowledge and real-world operational data. The open, white-box modelling approach allows engineers to understand precisely how risk calculations are performed and modify them without software updates.

This transparency matters. When presenting recommendations to management or regulators, integrity engineers need to demonstrate confidence in their methodology. The solution's DNV pedigree provides that assurance while delivering practical, actionable intelligence for daily decision-making.

Monetized risk that speaks to decision makers

Unlike systems that merely prioritize tasks based on relative or unitless scores, DNV risk models configured within Synergi Pipeline can quantify facility risk in financial terms. This approach facilitates genuine cost-benefit analysis, supporting rate case justifications to regulatory bodies and helping engineers communicate more effectively with financial stakeholders.

Imagine anticipating a critical valve's likely failure weeks before it happens—not through routine or ad-hoc discovery methods, but through precision risk intelligence and integration of all available data. This approach translates operational stresses into measurable financial impacts, which can help reduce downtime, repair costs, cleanup expenses, and fines. 

"The difference is profound," notes Woll. "When you can demonstrate that spending X dollars on preventive maintenance now avoids a 10X dollar repair scenario with high probability, budgetary conversations become much more productive."

The bottom line: Protection that pays for itself

With aging infrastructure and increasing regulatory scrutiny, effective facility risk management is essential for business. By extending the same quantitative rigor to facility assets that we have long applied to pipelines, Synergi Pipeline delivers protection that pays measurable dividends.

For integrity engineers looking to move beyond reactive maintenance, for operators seeking to optimize capital expenditures, and for executives needing to justify risk mitigation investments, this approach transforms uncertainty into opportunity.

The question isn't whether you can afford comprehensive facility risk management; the question is whether you can afford to continue without it.

Author: Alex Woll, Pipeline Risk Head of Section at DNV