Proactive Traceability
Preventing Costly Errors in Midstream Construction
By Veronika Lavergne and Ashley Hannah
Introduction
In 2023, a major Canadian Midstream Operator faced a complex challenge during the construction of a mega pipeline. With multiple survey groups working independently across different sections of the project, maintaining asset traceability and ensuring data accuracy became critical. Vintri was engaged early to provide oversight, data validation, and audit support — ultimately helping the Operator catch and resolve a high-risk discrepancy before project completion.
The Challenge
As construction neared completion, Vintri’s audit uncovered a critical traceability issue: a single pipe appeared to have been installed in two different sections of the pipeline.
Vintri’s review revealed that a pipe with the same unique identifier appeared in the records of two separate construction spreads, recorded months apart. This duplication raised immediate red flags about the reliability of the as-built files.
Because each section was managed by independent survey groups, the risk of inconsistent or conflicting data was significant. If left unresolved, the Operator faced the possibility of:
Costly integrity digs to prove the pipe’s location
Regulatory scrutiny for conflicting asset data
Legal exposure if the pipe’s traceability could not be confirmed
Resolving this discrepancy before commissioning was essential to protect both compliance and safety.
The Solution
Vintri immediately escalated the discrepancy and partnered with the Operator’s QA team to investigate. Despite initial reluctance from the survey groups involved, the Operator pushed forward, relying on Vintri’s ability to cross-verify multiple data sources:
Photographic evidence: Survey groups were required to submit installation photos. One group produced clear images showing the pipe’s OD stencil, Pipe ID, and heat number. The other provided only a partial photo that omitted the full pipe ID.
Movement and stockpile data: Confirmed the pipe had only ever been shipped to one section, reinforcing the evidence that it was correctly installed there and not in both locations as the records suggested.
Inventory cross-check: Analysis of all pipes from the same heat revealed a similar ID assigned to the second section, which was missing from their as-built records.
Root cause identified: The QA team concluded the likely cause was a simple transposition error — such as mishearing a “5” for a “9” in noisy field conditions.
By triangulating photographic, shipment, and inventory data, Vintri helped the Operator confirm which section the pipe was actually installed in and corrected the as-built records before the project closed out.
“Vintri’s ability to cross-check multiple data sources gave us confidence in our records and prevented what could have been a costly and time-consuming issue after the pipeline was completed.”
Key Findings & Outcomes
Because Vintri was engaged before construction wrapped up, the Operator was able to identify and resolve the discrepancy while the project was still active. The as-built records were corrected to accurately reflect what had been installed, ensuring traceability and compliance.
Had this error gone unnoticed, the Operator could have faced:
Costly integrity digs in two different sections to verify pipe locations
Regulatory penalties for incomplete or conflicting data
Legal exposure if asset traceability could not be proven
Instead, Vintri’s proactive approach enabled a fast, cost-effective resolution.
“This case highlights why engaging Vintri early in a project is so valuable. By building multiple verified data points across each asset’s lifecycle, we can catch discrepancies before they become risks for our clients.”
Three factors made the difference:
Early engagement — Vintri had access to both inventory and as-built records.
Robust data set — Multiple independent sources (photos, shipment logs, inventory) could be cross-verified.
Timely action — The discrepancy was caught before project close-out, leaving time for investigation and correction.
The client’s QA team determined the likely cause was a simple transposition error, common in noisy field conditions where numbers can be misheard or misrecorded (e.g., mistaking a “5” for a “9”).
Overall, the client’s project team was thoroughly impressed with their first experience with proactive data preparation. In fact, this team elected to immediately introduce the Vintri team to another project team within its Major Projects Group with the intention of applying Phase One and Phase Three services for this group’s project needs.
Next Steps
Ensure your as-built files accurately reflect what’s in the ground. Connect with Vintri to learn how our data validation and cross-verification processes can help your team avoid costly errors, regulatory risk, and integrity digs.
Schedule a Demo of vintriCORE.