Reflecting on a project of a lifetime

When I pulled up to the world's third-largest usable space building, I knew I had to leave any fear of heights in the car.

This was in spring 2005, when I visited NASA’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) in Cape Canaveral, Fla. My task was to examine how cathodic protection (CP) would stop the roof degradation of a national architectural landmark.

It’s not often that we get the opportunity to work on one of the most recognized buildings in the country, if not the world. So we were thrilled when NASA chose our conductive coating system -- the MATCOR CPBD-III -- as a long-term solution against the concrete roof's cracking, delamination, and spalling.

At first glance, I wondered how I would make it to the top of the 525-foot structure. The answer: an external steel construction elevator along the side of the building.

But before I made the climb with a NASA escort, every item I had on me was carefully examined. This went beyond accounting for loose change in pockets. It meant such detail as taping the stone in my college ring so it wouldn’t dislodge and fall on NASA personnel or assets.

The NASA message was clear: Safety in the air and on the ground came first. That was our mission. We were there to protect NASA employees and visitors from leaks and debris falling from the roof.

Indeed, the VAB roof had been deteriorating for years, to the point where NASA had to install a steel sub-roof to catch the concrete chunks. NASA technical liaisons then looked to stop corrosion of the conventional, steel-reinforced concrete roof.

NASA awarded that portion of the project to Cathodic Protection Technology, a MATCOR licensee in Florida and key partner on the project. CPT President Jim Emory joined me to examine the 214,500 square-foot surface area.

The material scope and logistics of this project were one of the most extensive MATCOR has engineered. With all items heading up the same construction elevator that took me to the top, the installation required a high level of logistics and planning.

Special features included maintenance considerations, such as installation of remote monitoring units (RMUs), so system parameters and activity could be monitored anywhere.

We commissioned the final customized system in February 2006 with eight separate CP zones. We left Florida knowing that one of our national landmarks was fully protected, and feeling completely pumped up that we had been involved.

Why small operators need CP consultants

For some customers, staying on top of changing regulations in CP can be confusing and difficult. Pipeline operators who aren’t aware of the changes, and don’t communicate with industry standard setters, are likely to get burned.

But knowing when regulations change isn't easy. Often, new regulations come to our attention simply by talking with industry peers at conferences and meetings. These conversations open up good dialogue of how to approach CP in regard to changing regulations.

Case in point: I recently received a call from the owner of a small pipeline company in East Texas. He was concerned with the new PHMSA/state regulations, and how they would affect integrity-related issues. He was also trying to get a handle on state mandates, and how they synchronize with existing federal regulations.

It turned out he needed more than a good CP program to comply with these new regulations. He also needed a CP consultant who knew what regulations were about to be approved, so he could maximize his investment.

I advised him to find a consultant with the credentials to perform the integrity-related tasks new regulations require. Such credentials should include a wide range of services, professional affiliations such as NACE, and insurance that includes errors and omissions policies.

But here was my most important tip for the business owner: Find a consultant capable of handling the needs of smaller pipeline companies. To me, this meant a consultant who understands daily challenges small entities face, such as weighing business expansion with the necessity of industry standard compliance.

It might mean more upfront costs for small operators, but it will save headaches on the back-end. And that's a balance any business owner would be happy to strike.

Waiting for disaster to strike

That sounds terrible, doesn't it? After all, we are in the business of preventing disaster. We use proven technologies to ward off catastrophic failures of metallic structures.

On the outside, we're the good guys who get to wear white hats. Yet, it is up to us to react with immediacy to spectacular failures that validate our existence as corrosion engineers.

Without them, nobody would be interested in corrosion prevention. The press would never show any interest in our work. And local state and the federal government would have no incentive to create regulations requiring corrosion control.

It would be great to prevent corrosion without the disaster. But that is not how we react as humans.

A great case in point is the power industry, a critical sector for the health of any country. The United States just finished a boom period that saw thousands of gas-fired power plants built over the past 20 years. Each one supplied their natural gas feed stocks from buried transmission pipelines, heavily regulated by the Department of Transportation and other local agencies.

And why are they heavily regulated? You guessed it -- disasters. Really nasty ones where gas pipelines explode, kill school children, and catch the attention of communities and politicians.

Every gas-fired power plant has a metering station, similar to a home's. At a power plant, the metering station is the boundary for ownership of the natural gas product and for responsibility for corrosion control.

Yet it's also the boundary for the regulations. Power plants are not bound to the same regulations that apply to gas pipeline companies. That means metering points outside the power plant undergo frequent corrosion testing and inspecting, while metering points within do not -- hence the existence of gas-fired plants with buried gas pipelines feeding their turbines.

Worse, power-plant personnel are blissfully unaware of the life-threatening risks below them. The corrosion control system that power plant designers often put in are contractor-grade, vanilla CP systems. These systems may work, but require frequent testing, and are easily knocked off line.

Designers often don’t care if the systems are not reliable because they only have a one-year plant warranty. After that, it is up to the operator to keep them online. And since operators are only concerned with producing energy, they don’t understand what CP system they have, what they need to make it work, or how to test it.

There are some exceptions -- plants that have well-designed, robust CP systems maintained and tested by qualified NACE CP Certified technicians. But they are few and far between.

If we have a catastrophic gas explosion at a power plant -- and in my opinion, that will happen soon -- perhaps the disaster would open the Power industry’s eyes. Because right now, their eyes are wide shut.