MSOE Library Home
MSOE Library Home
 Home 
 Search 
 My Account 
   
BasicAdvancedPowerHistory
Search:    Refine Search  
> You're searching: Walter Schroeder Library, Milwaukee School of Engineering
 
Item Information
 HoldingsHoldings
 
 
 More by this author
 
  •  
  • Newell, Kristine J.
     
     Subjects
     
  •  
  • Certification
     
  •  
  • Products liability
     
  •  
  • Gas industry -- Standards.
     
  •  
  • MSEM Thesis.
     
     Browse Catalog
      by author:
     
  •  
  •  Newell, Kristine J.
     
      by title:
     
  •  
  •  Product liability is...
     
     
     
     MARC Display
    Product liability issues in the natural gas industry : are natural gas distribution companies effective in approving pipeline components? / by Kristine J. Newell.
    by Newell, Kristine J.
    Subjects
  • Certification
  •  
  • Products liability
  •  
  • Gas industry -- Standards.
  •  
  • MSEM Thesis.
  • Description: 
    xi, 115 leaves : ill. ; 29 cm.
    Contents: 
    Committee members: Dr. Bruce Thompson, Cecil Head.
    The need to be effective -- History and trends -- The testing of pipelines components -- Product liability -- The LDC's role in product liability -- Recommendations and conclusions.
    The natural gas industry is more aware than ever that it must focus on its core competencies to be successful. Deregulation has brought new competition and profit (or loss) possibilities that allow many natural gas distribution companies to act and compete like any unregulated industry. This change has pushed many of these companies to take a hard look at what the company is doing, what it should be doing, and how it can do business better.
    One aspect of natural gas distribution that should be closely scrutinized is the process of approving products for use on the pipeline -- pipe, valves, couplings, etc. Large distribution companies typically had elaborate testing laboratories to test and approve products before the company utilized them in the field. These laboratories used a mixture of industry-standard and home-grown tests to prove the safety and adequacy of the products they used.
    Smaller distributions companies never had the resources to conduct such tests. Instead, these companies relied on a review of the tests and certifications provided by the manufacturer, as well as the reputation and experience of that manufacturer. Under intense regulation, the difference in new product approval between the large and small utilities was not notable. For a myriad of reasons, natural gas distribution developed into an extremely safe industry, despite the differences between large and small utilities.
    Two drastic changes have occurred that should alarm technical managers for the need to re-evaluate their new product evaluation practices. First, the industry became highly competitive, and unless there is direct business need for testing laboratories, budgeting for such endeavors has all but disappeared. Second, liability claims have sky rocketed. Customers and the public have become more sophisticated and demanding in their right for safety. Additionally, products liability law shifted the focus from the conduct of the company to the performance of the pipe. Both changes are profound. If a natural gas distribution company has not closely analyzed its practices, and then changed them based on logical and rational reasons, it is very likely that the company is not effective or productive in their actions. The company is obviously not managing its resources to be competitive if it is running elaborate tests to approve products just because the company is big enough to have a lab. Yet the smaller company that is not running those tests, or the large company that wants to stop the practice, had better have good reasons.
    The important point to note is that there are a number of activities at a natural gas distributor that work together to ensure the safety of its employees and the public.
    As long as the company has a rational and thorough analysis of its needs and its liability, product testing can be left to the manufacturers without jeopardizing safety. The utility does not gain any true benefits from conducting laboratory tests in their own facility for the purpose of approving a new pipe or fitting. This can lead to considerable cost savings in large utilities that continue to test each product before approving them for use on its distribution system. Dropping testing from the responsibilities of its technical personnel will also free them to concentrate on the activities that have the most impact on safety.
    Add to my list 
    Copy/Holding information
    LocationCollectionCall No.Status 
    Walter Schroeder LibraryMaster's ThesesAC805 .N49 1998AvailableAdd Copy to MyList

    Format:HTMLPlain textDelimited
    Subject: 
    Email to:


    Horizon Information Portal 3.25_9382
     Powered by SirsiDynix
    © 2001-2013 SirsiDynix All rights reserved.
    Horizon Information Portal