Many pipeline operators have ILI reports, direct assessment reports, excavation records, coating survey data, CP data, UT readings, and repair records — but the key question is whether this information is connected into a defensible integrity management system. PIMS is the engineering management framework that integrates all of these data streams into risk-based decisions.
ILI vendors provide important data and assessments, but operator or integrity engineering teams must convert those inputs into a comprehensive PIMS that covers all threats, non-ILI data, unpiggable sections, operational history, consequence ranking, and long-term integrity planning.
What Is PIMS?
A Pipeline Integrity Management System is an integrated engineering process used to manage pipeline threats and integrity decisions throughout the asset life cycle. PIMS includes asset data and pipeline segmentation, threat identification, risk assessment, inspection and assessment planning, ILI and non-ILI inspection data integration, defect assessment, mitigation and repair planning, reassessment interval planning, management of change, documentation, and continuous improvement.
PIMS is not just a software platform. Software may support PIMS, but the integrity logic, governance, data quality, and engineering decisions are the real system.
Why Inspection Data Alone Is Not Enough
Inspection findings only become valuable when interpreted in context: What threat does the feature represent? What is the likely growth rate and future condition? What is the consequence of failure at that location? Is the feature within the sensitivity and sizing accuracy of the tool? Are there other threats that were not assessed by this inspection? What else must be done before a safe decision can be made?
ILI Results and Their Role in PIMS
Companies that perform pigging or ILI provide valuable feature assessment, anomaly classification, preliminary severity ranking, remaining life calculations, or repair recommendations. However, these vendor assessments are typically based on the scope, data quality, tool performance, assumptions, and algorithms of that specific inspection project. They do not necessarily cover the complete pipeline integrity context.
ILI results should be reviewed and integrated by an engineering integrity team as part of PIMS. This is especially important for pipeline networks that include both piggable and unpiggable sections.
Mixed Pipeline Systems
Many pipeline networks include both piggable and unpiggable sections. In such systems, conventional ILI may be performed on piggable segments while alternative methods such as ECDA, ICDA, LRUT, external screening, targeted excavation, UT/PAUT, or direct examination may be required for unpiggable or difficult-to-access sections. A mature PIMS must integrate all of these data streams into one engineering decision framework.
Building the PIMS Data Framework
PIMS requires structured data: pipeline segments and asset hierarchy; material, diameter, wall thickness, coating, construction, and service history; inspection history and method limitations; CP/coating survey results; excavation and direct examination results; defect dimensions and assessment records; repair history; risk ranking; reassessment dates; action tracking and closure; and management of change records.
TES Canada Experience
TES Canada's leadership and team have practical experience supporting large-scale pipeline integrity programs covering approximately 3,700 km of above-ground and buried pipelines. Our approach integrates ILI data review, direct assessment, LRUT and advanced NDT, FFS/ECA for defect assessment, risk ranking, and PIMS development and data structuring.
TES Canada approaches pipeline integrity through a structured PIMS framework that integrates all data streams — ILI, direct assessment, advanced NDT, excavation findings, and operational data — into defensible, traceable engineering decisions.
Standards & References
- CSA Z662 — Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems
- ASME B31.8S — Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines
- NACE/AMPP SP0502 — Pipeline External Corrosion Direct Assessment Methodology
- API 1160 — Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
- API RP 580 / API RP 581 — Risk-Based Inspection
- API 579-1 / ASME FFS-1 — Fitness-for-Service
Need support with this type of technical challenge?
TES Canada can help you assess the issue, select the right inspection or engineering approach, and develop a practical integrity management solution.
Contact TES Canada →