Thursday, June 18, 2009

Commentary on SP0169

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Commentary on SP0169":

I am an end user/pipeline operator, a CP specialist, and a 20 year NACE member. As a profesional society, we have an obligation to advocate that which is technically correct. Only after that can we make allowances for 'that which works most of the time'.

I support changes to RP0169 that will bring the document to a level of technical correctness supported by state-of-the-art technical understanding about CP. The proposed revisions still allow a great deal of flexibility to use any other criterion demonstrated to work in that environment/situation. The obligation of proof is, however, appropriately delegated to the user wishing to make exceptions to the technical rule.

No comments: