Indirect survey techniques for underground pipelines are used to identify and define the
severity of coating flaws, other anomalies and areas at which corrosion activity may have
occurred or may be occurring. Of the several indirect inspection methods that are commonly
used for External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA), close-interval survey (CIS) is
considered the most widely accepted and accurate method for determining the probability and
severity of external corrosion threats to underground pipelines. For valid interpretation of the
CIS inspection results, the pipeline operator must consider the specific conditions along the
pipeline right-of-way and the expertise level of personnel analyzing the data. Typical criteria
used to assess the severity of the indication include the actual measured potential at the base
of the dip, the magnitude of potential change of the dip, the separation distance between ON
and OFF potentials, and whether the ON and OFF potentials are above or below cathodic
protection criteria. Depending on the experience of the individual analyzing the data,
interpretation and classification of the CIS indications can often be inconsistent. This paper
provides an analysis of CIS potential profile data based on practical experience using ECDA
methodology under various pipeline conditions.
Key Words: External Corrosion Direct Assessment, close interval survey, indirect survey, ON
and OFF potentials, cathodic protection, corrosion, data interpretation, severity classification