SABP-A-033.pdf

Best Practice SABP-A-033

30 March 2013

Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual Document Responsibility: Responsibility: Materials and Corrosion Control Standards Committee

Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents Foreword…………………………………………..… Foreword…………………………………………..….. ..….. ….. 2 1 References …………………………………….… 4 2 Definitions …………………………………….…. 6 Part 1: Basic Requirements and Deployment Activities 1 Introduction …………………………………….... 8 2 Policy and Strategies ………………..……...… 11 3 Organization …………………………..……….. 14 4 Deployment Methodology …………..………... 18 5 Review………………………………………..… 30 6 Central Engineering Review (Appendix 3)….. 31

Appendix 1 - Plant Informatio Information n Required …………. 33 Appendix 2 - Corrosion Corrosion Loops Loops Development Development …….. 35 Appendix 3 - CMP Checklist Checklist for for Self and Central Engineering Reviews ……..….. 37 Part 2: “Manage Corrosion” Work Processes…...... 42 Introduction ………………………………………. 43 Attachment Attachment 1 - “Manage Corrosion” at Design .….. 47 Attachment Attachment 2 - “Manage Corrosion” at Procurement and Construction ………..... 47 Attachment Attachment 3 - “Manage Corrosion” at Operate and Maintain ……………………. 47 Attachment Attachment 4 - “Manage Corrosion” at Decommissioning ………………………… 47 Part 3: Damage Mechanism Narratives………..…… Narratives………..…… 48 Introduction ……………………………..……….. 49

Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: TBD Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contacts: Sami M. Al-Ghamdi on 880-9573 and/or Abdelhak Kermad on 880-9529 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.

Page 1 of 52

Document Responsibility: Materials and Corrosion Control Standards Committee SABP-A-033 Issue Date: 30 March 2013 Next Planned Update: TBD Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual

Foreword Corrosion management management represents a key component of Saudi Aramco’s overall strategy to safeguard plant integrity, reliability and safety. It is founded on the following integrated elements: 1. Work Processes (Core, Strategic, Tactical, Elemental and Atomic) 2. Risk-Assessment 3. Competency and Training 4. Roles and Responsibilities 5. Technologies 6. Performance Measurement 7. Reviews and Continuous Improvement The Corrosion Management Program (CMP) is an integral part of Element 5 “Asset Integrity” Integrity” of the corporate Safety Management System (SMS). SMS and CMP are integrated tools developed by Saudi Aramco to manage asset performance and maximize plant reliability and utilization without compromise to safety and the environment. This Corrosion Management Program Manual represents the “what” what” and “how to” to” for deploying corrosion management strategies throughout Saudi Aramco operational facilities. It provides generic guidelines and principles that will require customization to specific plants or units. Process fluids, operating conditions and materials differ from one plant to another. Accordingly, appropriate corrosion control and mitigation strategies will be required to manage corrosion throughout the asset life cycle, i.e., at design, procurement and construction, operation and maintenance, and at decommissioning. Specifically, this manual addresses the operation and maintenance phase of the asset life cycle; however, its contents may also be adapted to address corrosion management during the other phases of the life cycle. It is noted that the biggest impact a corrosion management program may have on the long-term integrity and reliability of a plant is during the design phase. Accordingly, Saudi Aramco documents such as SAEP-14 “Project Proposal” Proposal”, SAEP-122 “Project Records” Records” and SAES-L-133 “Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment” Equipment” stipulate the development of a CMP for every new project or capital program at the earliest possible stage, based on established guidelines and principles given in these documents. Corrosion failure prevention is best achieved by focusing on the early stages of performance degradation or incipient failure; these stages, termed “non-critical failures” failures”, will result in “critical failures” failures” if left unattended or addressed too late. Accordingly, a key theme of CMP is proactivity; this is evident in the development of proactive leading/lagging indicators and Plant Integrity Windows (PIW). These performance metrics and variables represent the Dashboard of corrosion management across Saudi Aramco facilities. Therefore, diligent corrosion prediction and monitoring technologies play a critical role to safeguard the proactive nature of CMP.

Page 2 of 52


CMP development follows the “ plan-do-check-act” plan-do-check-act” approach. Essentially, corrosion management activities must first be rigorously planned; this planning must be according to the strategies set out by management. Another term for “do” do” is “strategize” strategize”. The plans developed must then be followed through or implemented. Another term for “do” do” is “implement” implement”. Once the plans have been put p ut into action, checks check s must be carried c arried out to ensure that the desired results are achieved, i.e., in the context of CMP, this means Manage Corrosion. Another term for “check ” is “analyze” analyze”. Finally, if analyses or checks show problematic system performance, then rectification is required to restore performance to the desired level or target. This final step would also involve system improvement by deployment of new technologies and updated knowledge. Another term for “act” act” is “rectify” rectify” or “improve” improve”. It is well-established that, without an integrated approach to corrosion management, equipment and piping failures will continue to occur, thus representing potentially major adverse risk to facilities, personnel, environment and company reputation. It is thus paramount that engineers in core engineering disciplines such as process/operation, inspection and reliability/maintenance are conversant with the impact of process operations, inspection and maintenance activities on corrosion. Work processes together with risk assessment, performance measurement, competency/training and performance reviews are developed with integration in mind so that corrosion management becomes everybody’s everybod y’s business. The essence of a corrosion management program lies in the deployment and management of procedures and systems to control the day-to-day corrosion related activities. Management of corrosion operates simultaneously at various levels within our organization/facilities, and includes: ●

a policy and management structure to deal de al with corrosion issues as part of the overall management process for the facility,

●

documentation and procedures for engineers and managers with responsibility for corrosion as part of the strategy or corrosion plan for the facility,

●

planning and implementation of corrosion control and monitoring activities

●

provision of means for the collection and assessment of site site inspection and monitoring data, and

●

a system to review corrosion related activities on a regular basis.

These procedures and systems include engineering reviews, adequate quality assurance and quality control of various aspects of design and construction, recording and trending of monitoring and inspection data, use of condition based strategies and use or risk assessments. This document is considered ever-green. Lessons learned shall be captured and anomalies rectified, thus driving a process of continuous improvement. CMP work processes, technologies, KPI and PIW targets shall be subjected to periodic reviews to ensure incremental improvement in this program.

Page 3 of 52


1

References 1.1

Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

SAEP-14

Project Proposal

SAEP-20

Equipment Inspection Schedule

SAEP-122

Project Records

SAEP-325

Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Pressurized Equipment

SAEP-343

Risk-Based Inspection

SAEP-1135

On-Stream Inspection Administration

Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards

SAES-A-007

Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures

SAES-H-001

Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment

SAES-L-108

Selection of Valves

SAES-L-132

Material Selection for Piping Systems

SAES-L-133

Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment

SAES-L-136

Pipe, Flange and Fitting Material Requirements

SAES-W-011

Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping

Saudi Aramco Best Practices

SABP-A-001

Polythionic Acid SCC Mitigation

SABP-A-013

Corrosion Control in Amine Units

SABP-A-014

Atmospheric Oil Degassing, Spheroids and Stabilizers Corrosion Control

SABP-A-015

Chemical Injection Systems

SABP-A-016

Crude Unit Corrosion Control

SABP-A-018

GOSP Corrosion Control

SABP-A-019

Pipeline Corrosion Control

SABP-A-020

Corrosion Control in Sulfur Recovery Units

SABP-A-021

Corrosion Control in Desalination Plants Page 4 of 52


SABP-A-025

Corrosion Control in Vacuum Distillation Units

SABP-A-026

Cooling Systems Corrosion Control

SABP-A-029

Corrosion Control in Boilers

SABP-A-036

Corrosion Monitoring Best Practice

Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports

1.2

SAER-2365

Saudi Aramco Mothball Manual

SAER-5573

Crude Distillation Unit Overhead Corrosion Study

SAER-5659

Guidelines for Setting Acceptable, Alarm and Shutdown Vibration Limits

SAER-5883

Cost of Corrosion in Existing Saudi Aramco Operations

SAER-5942

Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion in Hydrocracker and Refinery Sour Water Service

SAER-6403

Corrosion Control Document JNGLF Fractionation and Treating Modules 1/2/3/4

SAER-6344

Corrosion Control Document - ShGP CCD-1 ShGP Gas Treating Units 1/2/3/4

SAER-6353

Corrosion Control Document - Yanbu Refinery Continuous Catalytic Regeneration (CCR) Platformer Plant V11

SAER-6384

Corrosion Control Doc. - ABQ South Stabilizers Plant 120

SAER-6416

Corrosion Control Document JRD Crude Distillation Unit CDU-2

Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute

1.3

API RP 571

Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry

API RP 580

Risk Based Inspection

API PUB 581

Risk-Based Inspection Base Resource Document

API RP 584

Integrity Operating Windows

Publications

Saudi Aramco Safety Management System, Loss Prevention Department Qualitative Risk Assessment, Guide Number 02-002-2010, Saudi Aramco S afety Management Guide, Loss Prevention Department, 24 July 2010

Page 5 of 52


Guidance for Corrosion Management in Oil and Gas Production and Processing, Energy Institute, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), London, May 2008

2

Definitions Corrosion Loop (CL): A section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar process conditions, materials of construction construction or active/potential damage mechanisms. Corrosion Loop Diagram (CLD): A Process Flow Diagram (PFD) or Materials Selection Diagram (MSD) that is color-coded to reflect the develope d corrosion loops.

Corporate Program developed by Corrosion Management Program (CMP): CSD/ME&CCD aimed at reducing company cost of corrosion, predicting and preventing failures, improving plant availability, optimizing inspection and monitoring methods, promoting corrosion knowledge management, sustaining and enhancing corrosion prevention improvement, development and an d deployment of new and existing technologies, corrosion talent development and training, integration with other disciplines such as process, operations, inspection, maintenance and loss prevention. Damage mechanisms (DM): Types of corrosion and materials degradation a corrosion loop may be susceptible to potentially or during operations. Dashboard: Visual display of performance metrics or KPIs with color-codes and drilldown features. Key Performance Indicator (KPI): A measure associated with a specific activity; could be Financial, Internal or Result. Could be categorized as Leading or Lagging. Management of Change (MOC): A systematic process aimed at evaluating and documenting all plant changes and their impact impa ct on plant safety, integrity and profitability. Plant Assessment: Engineering review or condition assessment of a specific plant covering operations, inspection, corrosion, maintenance, pressure vessels, piping, fire equipment, electrical and reliability practices. Plant Integrity Window (PIW): A chemical or physical plant parameter with established minimum and maximum values; may be categorized as Safety PIW, Operational PIW or Integrity PIW. Safety Management System (SMS): Corporate document aimed at safeguarding company assets, personnel safety and the environment throughout the full life cycle; based on 11 Elements (including Asset Integrity-Element 5 ) with objectives, expectations and deliverables Work Process (WP): Series of activities or steps aimed at achieving a set objective, with input and output. Page 6 of 52


Part 1: Basic Requirements and Deployment Activities

Page 7 of 52


1

Introduction The Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual is structured in three (3) parts as follows:

1.1

●

Part 1: Basic Requirements and Deployment Activities

●

Part 2: “Manage Corrosion” Corrosion” Work Processes

●

Part 3: Damage Mechanism Narratives Purpose

The purpose of this manual is to provide guidance to Saudi Aramco operating organizations and engineers involved in the development and implementation of corrosion management systems for upstream and downstream facilities. Effective corrosion management shall result in:

1.2

●

Improved plant integrity and safety

●

Reduced corrosion failures

●

Maximum plant availability

●

Optimized mitigation, monitoring and inspection expenditure

●

Reduced loss profit opportunity

Scope

This manual addresses both upstream and downstream operational facilities. In this document, corrosion management is defined as the part of the overall management system that develops, implements, reviews and maintains the corrosion management policy and strategy. The policy provides a structured framework for corrosion risk identification and the development of appropriate cost-effective mitigation solutions. Corrosion management addresses the management of threats to mechanical integrity arising from mechanisms of material degradation, corrosion and failure, including but not limited to: ●

Mechanical and metallurgical failure mechanisms – graphitization, spheroidization, temper embrittlement, creep, thermal fatigue, vibrationinduced cracking, sigma phase embrittlement, dissimilar metal weld cracking, brittle fracture, etc.

●

Uniform or localized thinning – thinning – galvanic galvanic corrosion, caustic corrosion, CO2 corrosion, amine corrosion, corrosion-under-insulation, microbiologicallyinduced corrosion, etc. Page 8 of 52

Document Responsibility: Materials and Corrosion Control Standards Committee SABP-A-033 Issue Date: 30 March 2013 Next Planned Update: TBD Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual ●

High temperature corrosion – corrosion – sulfidic sulfidic corrosion, oxidation, carburization, metal dusting, fuel ash corrosion, etc.

●

Environmental-assisted cracking – cracking – chloride/caustic/amine/ammonia chloride/caustic/amine/ammonia stress corrosion cracking, corrosion fatigue, etc.

These mechanisms are all covered in the damage mechanism narratives given in Part 3 of this manual. Importantly, CMP is considered proactive and risk-based. The proactive nature of this program lies in addressing early signs of mechanisms leading to corrosion or partial loss of function of the asset. Accordingly, corrosion prediction and prevention via leading proactive measures or integrity operating windows is paramount to preventing critical failures (Figure 1).

Figure 1 - Failure Classification 1.3

CMP Framework

It is important that corrosion management activities are carried out within a structured approach that is visible, understood by all parties and where roles and responsibilities are clearly defined. This manual focuses on corrosion management in the “operate & maintain” maintain” phase of the life cycle. However, it also acknowledges the importance of the design phase in planning and implementing corrosion risk control barriers. The management system model advocated in this manual ( Figure 2) 2) is based on the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) model for the management of safetyrelated activity. Page 9 of 52


The essential elements of this framework are: 1. Clear Policies and Objectives of the organization (Saudi Aramco) 2. Organizational Structure and Responsibilities of managers and staff within the organization (Central Engineering or Proponent) 3. Corrosion Risk Assessment and Planning of activities according to risk 4. Implementation and Analysis of planned activity and its reported outcome 5. Measure System Performance against pre-determined criteria or targets 6. Systematic and Regular Review of system performance; this provides a feedback loop to improve performance via making appropriate adjustments adjustments to policies policies,, objectiv objectives, es, organizat organizational ional structur structure/re e/respo sponsib nsibilit ilities, ies, planning, planning, implementation/ analysis or performance measures The first five steps are concerned with the setting up a basic management system, whilst reviews, the sixth step, forms part of a verification system. These elements are addressed in detail in the subsequent sections. Successful Corrosion Management

Best Practices Engineering Standards Industry Standards

Policy & Strategies

Accountabilities Competency Training

Organization & Responsibilities

Likelihood & Consequences Criticality

Risk Assessment

Inspection & Maintenance Plans Corrosion Management Strategy

Monitor Trends Anomaly Tracking Key Performance Indicators

Review

Planning & Implementation

Performance Measurement

Review of Performance

Review, Correct Update

Yes

Management of Change

No

Satisfactory Performance

Figure 2 - Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Framework

Page 10 of 52


2

Policy and Strategies Effective policy and strategies set a clear direction for the Saudi Aramco organization to follow, aiming at the elimination of corrosion failures and an improvement of mechanical integrity and safety. CMP policy reflects the vision of Saudi Aramco and a genuine commitment to action. Strategies provide the means by which the policy is implemented. Policy and strategies should be widely communicated in awareness campaigns. 2.1

Saudi Aramco Corrosion Management Policy

Saudi Aramco is committed to preventing and managing corrosion of its plants and assets to ensure that the Company's vision is to remain the most reliable supplier of energy to the World and a steward of safety and the environment. The management of corrosion shall be led by a formalized strategy resulting in an integrated Corrosion Corrosion Management Program (CMP). Saudi Aramco will deploy the most effective and modern predictive, diagnostic and data management techniques to ensure that the risks associated with the corrosion failure of plant are fully understood and maintained As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) throughout the asset life-cycle. To achieve this, Saudi Aramco shall ensure that: ●

The roles and responsibilities associated with planning, implementing, maintaining and improving corrosion management are clearly defined.

●

The competencies required to perform these roles and discharge these responsibilities are defined and the staff fulfilling these roles are fully competent and fully aware of their responsibilities.

●

The risks associated with the corrosion failure of plant are identified and managed so as to remain ALARP.

●

Assets are designed, procured, fabricated, installed and commissioned in accordance with approved processes, specifications and standards.

●

The handover of new plant to operations is effectively managed through Management of Change (MOC) processes, including the provision of appropriate documentation and training requirements required to operate the plant safely and effectively.

●

Plant assets are operated within their design envelope and proactive detection technologies are utilized to ensure that any deterioration or noncompliance that could affect the integrity of assets are reported, assessed and actions taken.

●

Activities designed to manage threats to the corrosion of assets are not unduly compromised by cost, scheduling or production targets. Page 11 of 52


2.2

●

Management of Change processes are used so that corrosion risks associated with any changes (e.g., hardware, software, processes, procedures or manning levels etc.) that might affect the integrity of the assets are assessed and approved prior to implementation.

●

Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) are developed to model and measur e the effectiveness of the corrosion management processes and facilitate the implementation of proactive corrosion management methodologies.

●

All corrosion failures, incidents or near misses related to corrosion are thoroughly investigated to determine root causes a nd any lessons learnt are communicated across the Company.

●

Contractors and manufacturers/suppliers are regularly surveyed and selected so that they share our corrosion management program goals and can perform their assigned duties and tasks safely and effectively.

●

Corrosion management processes are subject to regular reviews.

●

Corrosion data visualization and knowledge management systems are implemented to allow for both continuous improvement and effective knowledge sharing.

Strategies

Most practices and procedures employed for the control of corrosion in operational facilities involve proven technology that is generally accepted worldwide. These can be considered as the tactical aspects or corrosion control options: ●

Materials Selection (steels, corrosion resistant alloys, non -metallics)

●

Chemical Treatments (caustic, neutralizers, inhibitors, biocides, cleaning)

●

Coatings (metallic, non-metallic and organic paints)

●

Cathodic Protection (galvanic or impressed current)

●

Process & Environmental Control (capacity, flaring, waste water treatment)

●

Corrosion Monitoring (coupons, probes, process variables)

Other tactical processes include Failure Analysis to identify root causes of asset deficiencies and modes of failure, with the objective to prevent failure recurrence. In addition, risk assessment methods such as Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) are aimed at inspection optimization based on corrosion risk levels. This practice is undertaken on new builds to identify corrosion threats and formulate corrosion mitigation barriers. It is also undertaken on existing facilities for inspection optimization and risk reduction. Other special assessment methods include Fitness-For-Service (FFS) and Remaining Life Assessment (RLA); these methods Page 12 of 52


are deployed to assess metal loss, crack/defect significance and predict remaining useful life of assets operating under time-dependent damage mechanisms. All above options are used either singly or in combination; the selection depends on the specific application (the structure/materials & loads, service life) and the corrosivity of local environments (crude slate, atmosphere, seawater, process fluids, etc.). Saudi Aramco corrosion management strategies are mapped out in multi-level work processes, namely, strategic, tactical, elemental and atomic. The processes for the “operate & maintain” maintain” phase are given in Part 2. Processes for other phases of the asset life cycle, i.e., design, procurement & construction, and decommissioning are also included in Part 3 of o f this manual for appropriate usage. In addition to the above corrosion control strategies, Saudi Aramco is committed to ensure that talent development shall play a key role in CMP deployment. Accordingly, competency maps (CMaps) and career path plans have been developed to ensure that central and plant corrosion engineers benefit from a rich program program of training, coaching coaching and mentoring to reach reach specialist specialist development status status after a period of approximately 10 years; this is achieved through the Specialist Development Program (SDP). Tr aining aining is regularly offered through the company’s Professional Engineering Development Division (PEDD). The Corrosion Engineering Development Program (COE-300) is an all-in corrosion course offered to Plant Engineers over a period of three months. Saudi Aramco continuously encourages engineers to obtain certification with reputable materials and corrosion bodies such as NACE International and ASM International. Accordingly, engineers are routinely enrolled to obtain appropriate certifications, as follows: ●

Corrosion Specialist - NACE

●

Corrosion Senior Technologist - NACE

●

Internal Corrosion Technologist - NACE

●

Corrosion Technologist - NACE

●

Chemical Treatment Specialist - NACE

●

Material Selection/Design Specialist - NACE

●

Protective Coatings Specialist - NACE/SSPC

●

Protective Coating Technologist - NACE/SSPC

●

Protective Coating Inspector - NACE/SSPC

●

Cathodic Protection Specialist - NACE

●

Cathodic Protection Technologist - NACE

●

Cathodic Protection Technician - NACE

Page 13 of 52


Cathodic Protection Tester - NACE

●

Material Selection and Design - ASM

●

Failure Analysis - ASM

●

Heat Treatment - ASM

●

Non Metallic Testing and Characterization - ASM

●

Metallic Coatings - ASM

●

Metallography - ASM

●

Welding - AWS/TWI(CSWIP)

Knowledge sharing and knowledge management complement the above training and development activities. Saudi Aramco’s knowledge sharing portal “ShareK “ShareK ” provides a platform for Communities of Practice (CoP) to discuss and share corrosion issues and company major corrosion challenges. ShareK also serves as repository or library for corrosion technical literature, reports and presentation material. Engineers have also access to multiple electronic materials and corrosion resources through the company’s Technical Information Center (TIC), e.g., SAI Global, ASM online, Corrosion Source, Energy Institute, Emerald, Engineering Encyclopedia, Metalinfo, ScienceDirect, OnePetro; and through corporate memberships with TWI, EPRI and PRCI. Technical exchange meetings at local and regional level are also routinely held to allow engineers from central engineering and plants to network and exchange ideas. Corrosion technology development is another mature strategy employed at Saudi Aramco through the company’s technology program. Engineers are encouraged to develop Technology Items (TIs) via local research and development or via partnering with outside organizations through single or Joint Industry Projects (JIPs). To complement the above strategies, a focus on company major corrosion challenges is a must. Chronic corrosion issues pausing disruption risks to plant operations or safety shall be addressed as a matter of priority and recommendations developed to eliminate these problems and prevent recurrence.

3

Organization 3.1

Introduction

Effective management structure and corrosion management practices are essential requirements for the delivery of policy and strategies. The establishment of a vibrant “corrosion culture” culture” invariably leads to improved asset integrity and personnel safety.

Page 14 of 52


The management of corrosion is a concern which extends beyond the responsibilities of corrosion and materials engineers. Whilst they should provide advice during both the design and operational phases, they are dependent upon the co-operation co-operation of other disciplines if an installation’s projected design life is to be achieved. The model below (Figure 3) provides a framework for that co-operation and for optimizing the contribution the corrosion and materials engineers make to an organization.

Figure 3 - Corrosion Information Flow in Projects 3.2

Deployment Structure

CMP deployment to operating facilities shall be structured along the guidelines given below. A CMP deployment organization chart is given in Figure 4 below. 4 below. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and engineers from the following disciplines shall be involved, as appropriate: Central Engineering ●

Corrosion

●

Materials & Welding

●

Coatings

●

Chemical Treatment

●

Cathodic Protection Page 15 of 52


Proponent ●

Corrosion

●

Inspection / OSI

●

Risk Based Inspection Coordination

●

Process & Operations

●

Technical Support Corrosion Specialist

Materials & Welding Specialist

CMP Team Leader

Coatings Specialist

Chemical & Water Treatment Specialist

Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Champion (CSD/ME&CCD Division Head)

Cathodic Protection Specialist

Plant Corrosion Engineer

Plant Inspection Engineer/OSI Coordinator

Plant CMP Leader

Plant RBI Coordinator

Plant Process/ Operations Engineer

Plant Technical Support Engineer

Figure 4 - CMP Deployment Organization Structure 3.3

Roles and Responsibilities Central Engineering CMP Team: ●

CMP Team Leader – Reports to CMP Champion, tasked with overall CMP deployment coordination, execution and single point of contact proponent champion; responsible for delivery of CCD and CMP training to facility. Page 16 of 52


Corrosion Specialist (may also play the role of CMP Team Leader) – Reports to CMP Team Leader; tasked with addressing all corrosion issues; works with all other engineers on materials / corrosion / welding / coating / chemical & water treatment / cathodic c athodic protection / inspection / operations issues, development of corrosion loops, undertaking of plant assessment and development of recommendations, PIWs, KPIs and dashboard, customization of damage mechanism narratives and development of CCD.

●

Materials & Welding Specialist (may also play the role of CMP Team Leader) – Reports to CMP Team Leader; tasked with addressing all materials & welding issues; works closely with central engineering corrosion specialist and proponent representatives on matters listed in 3.3.2 above.

●

Coatings Specialist – Reports to CMP Team Leader; tasked with addressing all coating issues; works closely with central engineering corrosion specialist and proponents representatives on corrosion / chemical treatment / inspection / maintenance / operations issues.

●

Chemical & Water Treatment Specialist – Reports to CMP Team Leader; tasked with addressing all chemical cleaning and water treatment issues; works closely with central engineering corrosion specialist and proponent representatives on corrosion / chemical & water treatment / inspection / maintenance / operations issues.

●

Cathodic Protection Specialist – Reports to CMP Team Leader; tasked with addressing all cathodic protection issues; works closely with central engineering corrosion specialist and proponent representatives on corrosion / inspection / maintenance / operations issues.

Proponent: ●

Plant CMP Leader – Reports to Plant CMP Champion and acts as the single point of contact, tasked with coordination of all CMP deployment activities in conjunction with the Central Engineering CMP Team Leader; responsible for delivery of all plant information/data/logistics to Central Engineering CMP Team Leader and execution/self-review of future CMP deployment.

●

Plant Corrosion Engineer (may also play the role of Plant CMP Leader) – Reports to Plant CMP Leader; tasked with provision of updated corrosion documentation and data, development of major corrosion challenges list, corrosion historical review, joint development of corrosion recommendations with the central engineering corrosion specialist, development of PIWs/KPIs/dashboard, participation in corrosion loop development and RBI study, customization of damage mechanism narratives, review of CCD and deployment deplo yment of CMP to other units. Page 17 of 52


4

●

Plant Inspection Engineer/OSI Coordinator – Reports to Plant CMP Leader; tasked with compiling inspection history review, provision of updated equipment and piping inspection/OSI data, participation in RBI study and review of CCD.

●

Plant RBI Coordinator – Reports to Plant CMP Leader; tasked with provision of RBI data and results to the Plant CMP Leader.

●

Plant Process/Operations Engineer – Reports to Plant CMP Leader; tasked with provision with all process information, access to PI system, participation in corrosion loop development, development of PIWs/KPIs/Dashboard and review of CCD.

●

Plant Technical Support Engineer – Reports to Plant CMP Leader; tasked with provision of maintenance history, welding repair recommendations and T&I history.

Deployment Methodology CMP deployment must follow the “Plan-Do-Check-Act” Plan-Do-Check-Act” approach so that lessons learned are captured/exploited and continuous improvement achieved at subsequent deployments. For this, the corporate CMP Database is designed to capture major corrosion challenges, potential damage dama ge mechanisms, performance measures, m easures, corrosion co rrosion management manage ment strategies, technologies and recommendations. This database also serves as a tracking system for reviews and recommendation implementation. Deployment activities are listed below (Figure 7) 7). 4.1

Pre-Deployment ●

Appoint team leader

●

Form a team

●

Assign roles and responsibilities

●

Develop scope of work and timeline (Example Gantt chart is given in Figure 5) 5)

●

Plan logistics

●

Request plant information (Appendix 1) 1) o

Asset list; critical equipment list

o

Inspection history, post-T&I reports

o

Process Description, PFDs, P&IDs

o

o

Material Selection Diagrams (MSDs), corrosion circuits, co rrosion monitoring reports Chemical injection/treatment programs, controls and historical performance data from chemical alliance

Page 18 of 52


●

o

Internal/external/consultant reports

o

Incident investigation, failure/root cause analysis reports

o

Risk-Based Inspection reports

o

Life assessment reports

o

Corrosion review reports

Conduct CMP Introductory Presentation Prior to deployment, the CMP Team Leader shall conduct an awareness presentation, covering the following:

4.2

o

CMP Objectives

o

CMP Methodology and Benefits

o

CMP Strategies

o

CMP Framework

o

CMP Deliverable – Deliverable – Unit-specific Unit-specific Corrosion Control Document

o

Deployment Plan

o

Proponent Requirements

o

CMP Deployment Timeline

Deployment 4.2.1

Work Process Gap Analysis

Perform “Operate & Maintain” Maintain” work process gap analysis, anal ysis, focusing on: ●

Procedures

●

Competency

●

Roles & Responsibilities

This activity shall contrast existing corrosion management work processes with those described in Part 2 of this CMP Manual. This exercise shall involve the participation of Central Engineering and Proponent Engineers in a workshop discussing all “operate & maintain” maintain” work processes and documenting gaps that may exist at the facility. The deliverable from this activity shall list all gaps identified and an action plan to address these gaps. These gaps may consist of procedural rectifications, tools & technology implementation, performance measurement or human resources development. It is noted that some of the “manage corrosion” corrosion” work processes for “operate & maintain” maintain” include the following:

Page 19 of 52


Develop corrosion management strategy

●

Perform corrosion risk assessment

●

Plan for process stream monitoring

●

Develop corrosion control strategy

●

Develop corrosion monitoring strategy

The full work processes are given in process maps in Part 2 of this CMP Manual. 4.2.2

Plant Information Review

Review plant information, focusing on:

4.2.3

●

Major corrosion challenges

●

Inspection/Repair/Replacement failure history

●

Incident investigations

●

Process upsets

●

Process variables

●

Operational practices

Plant Assessment

Perform plant assessment, focusing on major corrosion challenges, locations exhibiting corrosion classes 0 and 1 (SAEP-1135 SAEP-1135)), chronic fouling areas and equipment/piping nearing their end of life. The following lists key relevant items to check: ●

Corrosion monitoring systems, performance reports

●

Changes in process operating parameters, capacities and any future plans regarding feed quality

●

Maintenance and reliability reports, bad actor lists, failure reports and other statistics including replacement frequencies

●

Comparative analysis between operating and design parameters (temperature, pressure, flow and composition, etc.)

●

Coatings and non-metallics use and performance

●

Cathodic Protection performance

This exercise shall also include trending of critical operational/integrity variables such as: ● ●

metal temperatures process temperatures/pressures/delta temperatures/pressures/delta T/delta P

Page 20 of 52


flow rates

●

water wash rates

●

corrosion inhibitor dosage rates

●

corrosion/erosion/thinning rates

●

excess oxygen for fired equipment

●

Stream analysis (pH, H2S, CO2, NH3, Cl-, O2, pH2, salts, etc.)

The deliverable from this plant assessment task shall include appropriate recommendations addressing proactively all corrosion, materials degradation and fouling issues encountered in this exercise.

Figure 5 - Example Gantt Chart for a CMP Deployment 4.2.4

Corrosion Risk Assessment

In this CMP Manual, risk and criticality are used interchangeably. Risk assessment is an integral part of CMP. This permits the prioritization of assets based on their criticality levels and the development of appropriate integrity strategies. In assessing risks, the following aspects shall be considered: ●

Safety

●

Financial Page 21 of 52


Environmental

●

Reputation

Two methods are proposed to address a ddress risk assessment: ●

Apply RBI (Quantitative) study results, if available, or

●

Apply Loss Prevention Department Qualitative Risk Assessment Guide No. 02-002-2010. It is noted that this guide is qualitative in nature and as such considerable corrosion expertise is required to adequately identify probability of corrosion failure.

A generic 5x5 risk matrix is shown in Figure 6 below. Tables 1 and 2 provide the definition of likelihood and consequence/severity required to estimate the risks. Table 1 provides 1 provides guidance for frequency estimation for each identified hazard that will be based historical data as well as engineering judgment. Table 2 provides guidance for consequence estimation of each identified hazard, in terms of impact on people (safety), environment, financial, reputation, all estimated using engineering judgment. Once the frequency and consequence are analyzed, an alyzed, a risk level can be obtained for each hazard, by plotting the frequency and consequence in the risk matrix. This risk can be compared against risk criteria given in Table 3, 3, so that its tolerability can be judged.

Figure 6 - Risk Matrix

Page 22 of 52


Table 1 - Likelihood / Frequency

Table 2 - Severity / Consequence

Page 23 of 52


Table 3 - Risk / Tolerability Criteria (applies to Risk Matrix)

4.2.5

Corrosion Loops (Appendix 2) 2)

Develop corrosion loops as follows:

4.2.6

●

Review process, operating/design/start-up/shutdown/catalyst regeneration/upset conditions, contaminants

●

Identify the materials of construction

●

Identify active and potential damage mechanisms

●

Develop corrosion loops

Plant Integrity Windows (PIWs)

Develop PIWs focusing on mechanical and chemical variables affecting corrosion/material degradation, e.g., metal temperature, velocity, differential pressure, pH, contaminant or corrodent concentration (chlorides, H2S, CO2, caustic, oxygen, ammonium chloride, ammonium bisulfide, ammonium chloride, hydrogen partial pressure, etc.). Attention shall also be given to operating conditions at start-up, shutdown or end of run scenarios which may be life limiting. API RP 584 provides guidance on PIW or Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs). 4.2.7

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Develop KPIs relevant to corrosion performance measurement, focusing on number of critical failures, Thickness Measurement Locations (TMLs) showing Corrosion Classes 0 and 1, lost profit opportunity, 4.2.8

Damage Mechanism Narratives

The active and potential damage mechanisms derived during the Corrosion Loop workshop require customization. For this, the generic damage mechanism narratives given in Part 3 of this CMP Manual shall be Page 24 of 52


used as a basis but modified to address specific asset issues such as material of construction, corrosion control measures, inspection / monitoring techniques, KPIs and PIWs. 4.2.9

CMP Dashboard

The CMP Dashboard is a visual display of the KPIs and PIWs showing targets, compliance, impact of deviations and actions to rectify these deviations and restore integrity. Ideally, three CMP Dashboards shall be developed as follows: ●

Vice President Dashboard (Highest Level)

●

Manager Dashboard (High Level)

●

Superintendent Dashboard (Medium Level)

●

Supervisor and Engineer Dashboard (Detailed Level)

Examples of previously developed CMP Dashboards are given in Tables 4 – 7. They show the compliance/deviation of 4 parallel gas treating (GT) units. 4.2.10 Corrosion Management Strategies and Technologies

Appropriate corrosion management strategies, beyond those already existing and practiced at the plant, shall be identified together with any new or existing technologies that will make an impact on the proactive corrosion management process at the facility. These may include, but not limited to, corrosion monitoring, corrosion protection (organic coating, strip lining, weld overlay, thermal spray coating, cathodic protection), corrosion prediction (software), life assessment, material selection, statistical analysis, etc. 4.2.11 Closure Presentation

CMP deployment activities at proponent site shall conclude with a closure technical presentation highlighting to plant management preliminary findings and the following key points: ●

CMP methodology

●

Work Process gap analysis findings

●

Major historical corrosion challenges

●

Key corrosion threats, identified via the corrosion loop workshop

●

Risk assessment findings

●

Preliminary PIWs/KPIs

Page 25 of 52


Corrosion management strategies & technologies

●

Path forward (remaining activities/assessments, action plan to replicate CMP on other units at facility (including prioritization criteria)

4.2.12 Draft Corrosion Control Document (CCD)

A draft CCD shall be developed and submitted for plant proponent review. 4.2.13 Final CCD - Main CMP Deliverable

Upon receipt of proponent review comments from the draft CCD, a final CCD shall be developed and submitted to proponent as main CMP deliverable. This deliverable shall then be posted on Saudi Aramco Standards website for access within the company and future reference.

Page 26 of 52


Figure 7 - CMP Deployment Chart Page 27 of 52


Table 4 - Vice President CMP Dashboard #

1

2

Performance Measure

% of RBI studies completed compared to plan Lost Profit Opportunity (LPO) resulting from Corrosion Failures

Method

GT#

GT#

GT#

GT#

1

2

3

4

Timescale Timescal e

Target

Deviation Impact

Yearly

100%

Operating Plan

Integrity, Safety

Yearly

0

Manufacturing & Planning

Profitability

Table 5 - Manager CMP Dashboard #

1

2

3

Performance Measure

% of RBI studies completed compared to plan

Method

GT#

GT#

GT#

GT#

1

2

3

4

Timescale

Target

Deviation Impact

Yearly

100%

Operating Plan

Integrity, Safety

Lost Profit Opportunity (from corrosion failures)

Semiannually

0


Profitability

($MM) Corrosion Failures (critical) (#)

Semiannually

0

Inspection Report

Mechanical Integrity, Plant Utilization, Plant Availability

Table 6 - Superintendent CMP Dashboard #

1

2

3 4

5

Performance Measure

% of RBI studies completed compared to plan Lost Profit Opportunity (from corrosion failures) ($MM) Corrosion Failures (critical) (#) PIWs within Limits (%)

TMLs > 5MPY (Class 0, 1, 2) (%)

GT#

GT#

GT#

1

2

3

4

Target

Yearly

100%

Operating Plan

Integrity, Safety

Semiannually

0


Profitability

Semiannually

0

Inspection Report


PIW Dashboard

PIW Dashboard

UT Scanning

Erosion-Corrosion, Amine Corrosion, General Corrosion, Under-Deposit Corrosion, Sour Water Corrosion

Daily

Quarterly

100

0

Method

GT#

Timescale

Deviation Impact

Page 28 of 52


Table 7 - Supervisor/Engineer CMP Dashboard #

1

2

3 4

5

6

7 8 9

10 11 12

Performance Measure

% of RBI studies completed compared to plan Lost Profit Opportunity (from corrosion failures) ($MM) Corrosion Failures (critical) (#) PIWs within Limits (%)

TMLs > 5MPY (Class 0, 1, 2) (%)

Sour Feed Gas Throughput (MMSCFD) Lean DGA Strength Strength (%) Rich DGA Strength (%) Lean DGA Acid Gas Loading (mole/mole) Rich DGA Acid Gas Loading (mole/mole) Oxygen in DGA (ppb) pH of Lean DGA

GT#

GT#

GT#

1

2

3

4

Target

Yearly

100%

Operating Plan

Integrity, Safety

Semiannually

0


Profitability

Semiannually

0

Inspection Report


PIW Dashboard

PIW Dashboard

0

UT Scanning

Erosion-Corrosion, Amine Corrosion, General Corrosion, Under-Deposit Corrosion, Sour Water Corrosion

550 (max)

Flow Meter

Erosion-Corrosion

Daily

Quarterly

Daily

100

Monthly

50

Monthly

50

Monthly

0.07

Monthly

0.4

Monthly Monthly

5 9. 5

Method

GT#

Timescale

Acid-Base Titration Acid-Base Titration

Oxygen Sensor pH Meter

Deviation Impact

Amine Corrosion Amine Corrosion Amine Corrosion, Amine SCC Amine Corrosion, Amine SCC Amine Corrosion Amine Corrosion

Significant (negative) deviation from target Moderate (negative) deviation from target Compliance with or exceeds target

Page 29 of 52


5

Review 5.1

Performance Review

Performance review refers to the overall review of the Corrosion Management Program. Systematic reviews of performance based on data from corrosion monitoring and other enablers permits Saudi Aramco to continuously improve the CMP program via constant development of the policy, strategies and work processes. This will also ensure compliance with the changing business and operational plans and changing production requirements. Facilities, via the Plant CMP Leader, are required to conduct periodic (monthly, quarterly, semi-annually or annually) performance reviews on their facilities. The scope and frequency of this performance review shall be as follows: ●

Performance reviews shall involve all key players, including contractors or chemical suppliers

●

Performance reviews shall include: o

Procedures and work processes

o

PIWs deviation and corrective actions

o

KPIs deviations and corrective actions

o

Talent development/competency/training assessment

o

Technology deployment/Corrosion management systems

o

Asset condition/integrity

o

Documentation and knowledge management

●

The benefits of new techniques or technology shall also be considered

●

Performance review report shall include all good performance and promote good practices.

●

Performance review report shall include all corrective actions for the program and feedback into the strategy.

●

Performance review report shall be shared with all participants in the corrosion management activity both down the line and upwards to management within the facility. The plant manager shall receive a copy of the report or an executive summary.

●

Performance review report shall also be sent to Central Engineering CMP Team Champion at least 1 month prior to the Central Engineering CMP Review.

Page 30 of 52


5.2

Self Review 5.2.1

Perform CMP CMP self-review after 2 years from from the first deployment and every 2 years thereafter, using check-list (Appendix 3) 3). This self-review shall be carried out by the plant proponent at least 2-months prior to the Central Engineering review, focusing on: ●

CMP Dashboard (KPIs/PIWs) deviation and corrective actions i. ii. iii.

6

Asset condition/integrity Proactive performance detection Plant availability, performance and utilization

●

Technology deployment

●

Corrosion Human Resource (HR) review

●

Documentation and knowledge management

5.2.2

Perform Central Engineering review, focusing on the above items

5.2.3

Issue Central Engineering review report

5.2.4

Update Central Engineering CMP Database

Note:

For CMPs deployed locally by facilities themselves, the self-review shall be carried by the plant proponent and the review by Central Engineering.

Central Engineering Review (Appendix 3) The purpose of the reviews is to ensure that the CMP is efficient, effective and reliable, and that the work processes and activities are being implemented in accordance with the procedures. Review findings shall be used to improve the CMP and, where appropriate the corrosion management strategies. 6.1

6.2

The scope of the reviews should provide: ●

Assurance that the CMP includes all essential elements as stipulated in this CMP Manual

●

Assurance that the implemented activities provide suitable barriers to the corrosion threats and suitable monitoring to measure performance

●

Assurance that the CMP activities are implemented in accordance with their documented procedures, and

●

Input into reviews of performance.

Reviews shall be carried out in accordance with the checklist given in Appendix 3 and on the basis of objective evidence of compliance.

Page 31 of 52


6.3

Both internal and contractor led activity, e.g., chemical vendor, should be subject to this review.

6.4

Self-reviews shall be carried out by the Plant CMP Leader or plant corrosion engineer.

6.5

Reviews shall be carried by the Central Engineering CMP Team Leader or Corrosion Subject Matter Expert assisted by another engineer, both with competence in review practice and understanding of corrosion management strategies.

6.6

The Central Engineering CMP review team shall be independent of both operational and functional teams that are directly involved in implementing the CMP for the facility concerned.

6.7

Reviews shall be carried out on a planned schedule developed by Central Engineering CMP Champion, as follows: ●

Reviews shall be carried out every 2 years

●

Self-reviews shall also be carried out every 2 years, 2 months prior to the review by Central Engineering.

6.8

Central Engineering may bring forward a review if there is evidence of serious non-compliance that poses a threat to the effectiveness of the CMP and safety. In the event that non-compliance is detected, corrective action shall be agreed with the plant CMP leader or corrosion engineer and their management.

6.9

Review reports shall be made available to the facility management and Central Engineering CMP Champion, his management, i.e., in this case Consulting Services Department (CSD) Manager and supervisors of the review team.

6.10

Corrective action shall be recorded in the Central Engineering CMP Database that enables implementation, overdue actions and close out to be identified and tracked. Facility management and those responsible for actions shall receive regular reports from the Central Engineering CMP Champion on progress towards close out.

30 March 2013

Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Best Practice.

Page 32 of 52


Appendix 1 - Plant Information Required A1. Materials, Welding and Corrosion 

Periodic Corrosion Control and Chemical Treatment Vendor Reports



Corrosion Monitoring Locations/Data



Fitness for Service / Life Assessment Study Reports



Listing of PIW or Integrity Operating Windows (IOW) with targets



Corrosion, Cracking and Fouling Problems



Historical CP Surveys



Coatings Performance and Repair



Boiler Condition Assessment reports



Corrosion loops, annotated with damage mechanisms



Leakage history



Injection point program



Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI) strategy and plan



List of past failures associated with materials, welding or corrosion

A2. Inspection Requirements 

Critical Piping list



List of Piping class



Equipment inspection history and piping replacement



Documentation for all inspection programs, dead legs, small bore pipin g/nipples and drains, corrosion under insulation



Access to SAIF & corrosion isometrics drawings



Inspection unit audit reports



Post/Latest T&I reports

A3. Process Engineering 

Operating Manuals and process description



Design feed characteristics



Product specifications and properties



Material and Heat Balances



Battery limit conditions



Process upset history

Page 33 of 52


A4. General 

Process Flow Diagrams (PFD), P&IDs



Plant Equipment List



Equipment technical information, SIS, design drawings, as built drawings



Complete list of changes made in system s ystem within the past 5-10 years.



Failure Analysis Reports



Incident Investigations and near miss reports



Risk Based Inspection/Assessments Studies



Due Diligence Reports



Engineering Service Agreement Reports



Insurance Survey Reports



Integrity and Reliability Studies



Bad Actor/Problem List



Critical Equipment Plans



Previous assessment reports



Historical Capacity/Process Changes



Previous engineering recommendations and status of implementation



Loss Prevention Compliance Reviews



Safety Management System Reports



HAZOP Studies

Page 34 of 52


Appendix 2 - Corrosion Loops Development A1. Definition

A corrosion loop (CL) is a section of a plant pl ant defined mainly on the basis of:   

similar process conditions or materials of construction or active/potential damage mechanisms

Thus, a CL may contain different materials of construction and operational conditions, but common damage mechanisms. On the other hand, a damage mechanism (DM) is a type of corrosion and materials degradation a CL may be susceptible to potentially or during operations. The damage mechanisms (DMs), defined in Part 3 of this CMP Manual, are applicable to Saudi Aramco are based on international standards but were customized to account for our operational experiences and to include other Saudi Aramco upstream processes. During CMP deployment, damage mechanisms are usually customized to account for individual unit’s process streams, metallurgy, operating conditions, and inspection findings. Since there are continuous efforts to enhance our plants’ safety and profitability, the CLs/DMs need to be evergreen (continuously reviewed and updated) to account for these changes to be effective. A2. Use of Corrosion Loops

Corrosion Loops are used by Corrosion, Inspection and Process Engineers to assure Mechanical/Operational integrity of the plant, more specifically to aid in developing and deploying CMP. They are also used in Risk-Based Inspection (RBI), Plant Integrity Windows (PIW), On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Optimization and Saudi Aramco Chemical Optimization Program (SACOP). A3. When is a Corrosion Loops developed?

Since 2009, the development of corrosion loops has been mandated, as part of new projects’ projects’ Corrosion Management Program, as mandated in SAES-L-133 “Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment.” Equipment.” For facilities existing prior to 2009, Central Engineering CMP Team is developing/reviewing the corrosion loops in two (2) units per year with the intent to train Plant CMP Team to develop the corrosion loops and deploy CMP in other othe r major units within their facilities.

Page 35 of 52


A4. Corrosion Loop Development

Corrosion loops are considered the heart of CMP. The corrosion loop methodology is implemented at Saudi Aramco to break down a plant into manageable sections that can also be used in a RBI study, PIW development, OSI optimization and SACOP. For each corrosion loop, information is provided addressing the following: Brief process description (fluids, corrosives, temp., pressures, control measures, etc.) Corrosion loop description Major Major equipment and piping’s materials of construction Listing of all applicable damage mechanisms    

A corrosion loop diagram (CLD) is a color-coded drawing of the unit showing main process streams, major equipment/piping, materials of construction, and applicable damage mechanism. An example of a typical CLD is shown in Figure A1 below. For examples of corrosion loops, please refer to already developed online Corrosion Control Documents (SAER-6344 SAER-6344,, SAER-6353 SAER-6353,, SAER-6384 SAER-6384,, SAER-6403 SAER-6403,, and SAER-6416 SAER-6416). ).

Figure A1 - Example Corrosion Loop Diagram (CLD)

Page 36 of 52


Appendix 3 - CMP Checklist for Self and Central Engineering Reviews This section details the process of self and central engineering reviews of the CMP. The purpose of the reviews is to ensure that the CMP is efficient, effective and reliable, and that the work processes processes and activiti activities es are being being implemented implemented in accordance accordance with with the procedures. procedures. Review findings findings shall be used to improve the CMP and, where appropriate the corrosion management strategies. A1. The scope of the reviews should provide: 







Assurance that the CMP includes all essential elements as stipulated in this CMP Manual Assurance that the implemented activities provide suitable barriers to the corrosion threats and suitable monitoring to measure performance Assurance that the CMP activities are implemented in accordance with their documented procedures, and Input into reviews of performance.

A2. Reviews shall be carried out in accordance with the checklist given in Table A1 and on the basis of objective evidence of compliance. A3. Both internal and contractor led led activity, e.g., chemical vendor, should be subject to this review. A4. Self-reviews shall be carried carried out by the plant CMP Leader or plant corrosion engineer. A5. Reviews shall be carried by the Central Engineering CMP Team Leader or Corrosion Subject Matter Expert assisted by another engineer, both with competence in review practice and understanding of corrosion management strategies. A6. The Central Engineering CMP review team shall be independent independent of both operational and functional teams that are directly involved in implementing the CMP for the facility concerned. A7. Reviews shall be carried carried out on a planned schedule developed by Central Engineering CMP Champion, as follows:  

Reviews shall be carried out every 2 years Self-reviews shall also be carried out every 2 years, 2 months prior to the review by Central Engineering.

A8. Central Engineering may bring forward a review if there is evidence of serious noncompliance that poses a threat to the effectiveness of the CMP and safety. In the event that non-compliance is detected, corrective action shall be agreed with the plant CMP leader or corrosion engineer and their management. A9. Review reports shall shall be made available to the facility management and Central Engineering CMP Champion, his management, i.e., in this case Consulting Services Department (CSD) Manager and supervisors of the review team. A10. Corrective action shall be recorded in the Central Engineering CMP Database that enables implementation, overdue actions and close out to be identified and tracked. Facility management and those responsible for actions shall receive regular reports from the Central Engineering CMP Champion on progress p rogress towards close out.

Page 37 of 52

Document Responsibility: Materials and Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 March 2013 Next Planned Update: TBD

SABP-A-033 Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual Manual

Table A1 - CMP Review Checklist Corrosion Management Program Review Date:

Facility:

By:

Item

Question

Yes/No

Supporting evidence/ references and comments

A. Corrosion Management System A1

Is there a documented corrosion system based on the corporate strategic work process Manage Corrosion at operate & maintain phase of life cycle? Are you aware of the Corrosion Management Program policy defined in the CMP Manual? “

A2

”

B. Corrosion Competency B1 B2

B3

Is there a trained and experienced corrosion engineer at your facility? Are you using a Competency Map (CMap) to monitor development, training and competency of your corrosion engineer? Does your facility have a plan of succession for your corrosion engineer?

C. Risk Assessment C1

Has your facility developed corrosion loops and identified the damage mechanisms for all your plants/units?

C2

Does your facility perform corrosion risk assessments?

C2

Does your facility conduct investigations to identify root cause of all corrosion incidents?

C3

Has your facility adopted a risk-based inspection (RBI) program?

C4

Does your facility have a trained RBI facilitator?

Page 38 of 52


Item

Question

C5

Does your facility maintain a list of critical equipment and piping?

D. Corrosion Monitoring D1

Does your facility have a Computerized Corrosion Management System (CMS)?

D2

Does your facility monitor corrosion using:

D3

Process variables (physical, chemical)?

D4

Probes?

D5

Coupons?

D6

In-Line Inspection/Smart Pigging?

D7

Does your facility maintain a fully functional SAIF system?

D8

D9

Does your facility trend corrosion rate data and report this to management on a regular basis, e.g., monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually? Has your facility developed and makes use of Plant Integrity Windows to monitor corrosion management performance?

E. Chemical Treatment Does your facility monitor chemical and water injection rates


Yes/No



Item

Question

C5

Does your facility maintain a list of critical equipment and piping?


Yes/No


D. Corrosion Monitoring D1

Does your facility have a Computerized Corrosion Management System (CMS)?

D2

Does your facility monitor corrosion using:

D3

Process variables (physical, chemical)?

D4

Probes?

D5

Coupons?

D6

In-Line Inspection/Smart Pigging?

D7

Does your facility maintain a fully functional SAIF system?

D8

D9

Does your facility trend corrosion rate data and report this to management on a regular basis, e.g., monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually? Has your facility developed and makes use of Plant Integrity Windows to monitor corrosion management performance?

E. Chemical Treatment E1 E2

Does your facility monitor chemical and water injection rates and correlate with thinning/failure rates? Do you hold regular (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) review meetings with your Chemical Vendor?

E3

Are there KPIs targets defined for your Chemical Vendor?

E4

If yes, is your Chemical Vendor meeting the KPI targets?

E5

Do you investigate Chemical Vendor KPI target deviation?

Page 39 of 52


Item

Question

F. Corrosion Protection F1

Does your facility have a coating (internal & external) and lining management program?

F2

Does your facility maintain a cathodic protection system?

G. Inspection Does your facility maintain the following inspection programs: G1

a.

Injection Point?

G2

b.

Corrosion under Insulation?

G3

c.

Dead Leg?

G4

d.

Positive Material Identification?

G5

e.

Welding inspection?

G6 G7

Does your facility apply the appropriate inspection method to the relevant damage mechanism? Are your Thickness Measurement Locations (TMLs) adequately defined and subject to periodic reviews?

H. Technology


Yes/No



Item

Question


Yes/No


F. Corrosion Protection F1

Does your facility have a coating (internal & external) and lining management program?

F2

Does your facility maintain a cathodic protection system?

G. Inspection Does your facility maintain the following inspection programs: G1

a.

Injection Point?

G2

b.

Corrosion under Insulation?

G3

c.

Dead Leg?

G4

d.

Positive Material Identification?

G5

e.

Welding inspection?

G6 G7

Does your facility apply the appropriate inspection method to the relevant damage mechanism? Are your Thickness Measurement Locations (TMLs) adequately defined and subject to periodic reviews?

H. Technology H1

I.

Do you think your facility has deployed sufficient/relevant technologies to manage corrosion?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) I1

J.

Has your facility developed and makes use of key performance indicators to manage corrosion failures?

Knowledge Management (KM) J1

Is there a Corrosion Knowledge Management Program at your facility?

Page 40 of 52


Item J2

Question Does your facility share failures or good corrosion engineering practices with other facilities?

K. Documentation K1

Does your facility maintain an electronic document management system (inspection reports, post-T&I reports, failure analysis reports, corrosion monitoring/trending, reports, etc.)? Does your facility keep updated documents, as follows?

K2

a.

SIS sheets

K3

b.

PFDs

K4

c.

P&IDs

L. Management of Change (MOC) L1

Do you include all modifications (equipment, piping, water wash rate, inhibitor injection rate, welding repair, material changes, etc.) impacting corrosion in your MOC procedure?

M. Reviews M1

Does your facility initiate a failure analysis request (to CSD) for all corrosion/mechanical failures? Does your facility keep an updated corrosion-related


Yes/No



Item J2

Question


Yes/No


Does your facility share failures or good corrosion engineering practices with other facilities?

K. Documentation K1

Does your facility maintain an electronic document management system (inspection reports, post-T&I reports, failure analysis reports, corrosion monitoring/trending, reports, etc.)? Does your facility keep updated documents, as follows?

K2

a.

SIS sheets

K3

b.

PFDs

K4

c.

P&IDs

L. Management of Change (MOC) L1

Do you include all modifications (equipment, piping, water wash rate, inhibitor injection rate, welding repair, material changes, etc.) impacting corrosion in your MOC procedure?

M. Reviews M1 M2 M3

Does your facility initiate a failure analysis request (to CSD) for all corrosion/mechanical failures? Does your facility keep an updated corrosion-related recommendation and technical alert tracking system? Does your facility perform internal periodic corrosion reviews to monitor compliance and eliminate corrosion failures?

Page 41 of 52



Part 2: “Manage Corrosion” Work Work Processes

Page 42 of 52


Introduction This part describes the “Manage Corrosion” Corrosion” work processes. Although the current CMP Manual addresses the “operate & maintain” maintain” phase of the asset life cycle (Attachment 3) 3), work processes for all phases p hases of the life cycle c ycle are included in this part, i.e., Design, Procurement & Construction, Decommissioning. These are presented here for completeness and future reference. However, for the gap analysis task at commencement of CMP Deployment, only the “operate & maintain” maintain” work processes (Attachment 3) 3) shall be used. It is noted that work processes were developed in 2010 by Saudi Aramco subject matter experts in conjunction with an outside consultant. This exercise was undertaken to develop a corporate asset integrity management system initially referred to as “Plant Integrity Assurance Framework ” (PIAF), then later changed to “Asset Performance Management” Management” (APM). Four strategic work processes were initially developed for the following disciplines, as depicted below in Figure 8: ●

Inspect Assets (Inspection) – (Inspection) – SWP-04-03 SWP-04-03

●

Maintain Assets (Maintenance & Reliability) – Reliability) – SWP-04-04 SWP-04-04

●

Manage Corrosion (Materials & Corrosion) – Corrosion) – SWP-04-05 SWP-04-05

●

Manage Operations (Process/Operations) – (Process/Operations) – SWP-04-06 SWP-04-06

For ease of understanding of the process maps in Attachments 1 – 4, the nomenclature and descriptions used are illustrated in Figures 9 & 10 10..

Figure 8 - Strategic Work Processes

These work processes (highest level) are then decomposed into Tactical (TWP), Elemental (EWP) and Atomic (AWP) (lowest level), as depicted in the process maps given in Attachments 1 – 4 – 4. For systematic purposes, these processes are structured to follow the PlanDo-Check-Act format to ensure continuous improvement. These work processes will require periodic updating to ensure alignment with other company work processes and business needs.

Page 43 of 52


An example of work process gap analysis is shown in Table 8 for illustrative purposes. The gap analysis workshop shall be carried at commencement of every CMP Deployment as follows: 1.

“Operate & Maintain” Maintain” work process maps are shown on screen projector in sequential format.

2.

Central Engineering CMP Team Leader describes the steps in the first work process to CMP participants and asks Proponent CMP Leader and other plant participants whether the subject work process or similar work process exists at the plant.

3.

Plant participants provide comments and share their work process or procedures if these exist.

4.

Gaps are then identified and documented for inclusion in the CMP Corrosion Control Document (CCD).

5.

Recommendations are then developed to address these gaps and improve corrosion management at the plant. These recommendations shall be documented in the CCD.

Note: Work processes may be categorized as either fully performed, partially performed or not performed.

Table 8 - Example Work Process Gap Analysis Work Process

Gap Identified at Plant X

Gap Identified in CMP

EWP 04-05-03-01 Corrosion Data Assessment

• This work process is not fully reflected in RTR activities. However, Failure Analysis is performed by CSD; RCA is performed by RTR systematically as given by GI using TAPROOT and metallurgical examinations are performed on a certain percentage. • The SARCOP quarterly review considers interrelated factors and unusual data

• There is no corporate procedure reflecting this WP. • There is a gap in procedure procedu re for the quality checking of all data.

EWP 04-05-03-02 Corrosion Management Review

• There is no comprehensive Corrosion Review but OSI data is reviewed periodically • Best practices should be integrated with the PIW team

• The two WPs (Data Assessment and Management Review) should be combined. • There is no standard for a comprehensive corrosion management review. (Though there is a quarterly SARCOP review).

Page 44 of 52

Document Responsibility: Materials and Corrosion Control Standards Committee SABP-A-033 Issue Date: 30 March 2013 Next Planned Update: TBD Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual Plant Integrity Assurance Framework Map Key and Glossary

Work Process Symbols

Work Process Hierarchy

GWP XX-XX-XX Title

Start / Finish Process

Global

SGWP XX Title

Support Global Work Process

Activity Number

Action Addressee Process Activity Informed Addressee(s)

SWP XX-XX-XX Title

Strategic

SSWP XX-XX Title

Support Strategic Work Process

Decision? TWP XX-XX-XX Title

External Process

Tactical

EWP XX-XX-XX Title

Document

Record to be maintained

2

SAIF

SAP

Elemental

Off-page Reference for Navigation

SAIF Data Management System

AWP XX-XX-XX Title

Atomic

STWP XX-XX-XX Title

Support Tactical Work Process

SEWP XX-XX-XX Title

Support Elemental Work Processes

SAWP XX-XX-XX Title

Support Atomic Work Processes

SAP Data Management System

Figure 9 - Process Map Nomenclature Page 45 of 52


Attachment 1 - “Manage Corrosion” Corrosion” at Design

(Double click to open the PDF document)



Adobe Acrobat Document

CorManPro Design_10 integrated 1

Attachment 2 - “Manage Corrosion” Corrosion” at Procurement and Construction





CorManPro_PCC_8 1

Attachment 3 - “Manage Corrosion” Corrosion ” at Operate and Maintain





CorManPro_14 integrated 1

Attachment 4 - “Manage Corrosion” Corrosion” at Decommissioning





Manage Integrity during Decommissioning 1 Note: These attachments may only be downloaded if you are connected to the network. If you wish to

read these attachments offline, you are required to download them from the network to view later.

Page 47 of 52


Part 3: Damage Mechanism Narratives

Page 48 of 52


Introduction This part describes generic narratives for damage mechanisms encountered or likely to be encountered at Saudi Aramco upstream and downstream facilities. These are provided here for use at future CMP deployments; however, these require customization to actual plant service conditions. These narratives have been derived from API RP 571 and other Saudi Aramco / Industry documents. They have been structured to address the damage description, the affected materials, control methodology, corrosion monitoring and inspection techniques. A full listing of the narratives is given in Table 9. 9. These have been assigned an SA (Saudi Aramco) reference number as well as the actual number given in API RP 571, as appropriate. The damage mechanism narratives are given in the PDF attachment below:

Adobe Acrobat Acrobat

( Do Do u b l e c l i c k t o o p e n t h e P D F d o c u m e n t )

Document

Damage Mechanism Narratives Note: This attachment attachment may only be downloaded if you are connected to the network. If you wish to

read this attachment offline, you are required to download it from the network to view later.

Page 49 of 52


Table 9 - Damage Mechanism Narrative List

SA # 1 2 3 4 5 6 (NA) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 (NA) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Description

Sulfidic Corrosion (Sulfidation) Wet H2S Damage (Blistering/HIC, SOHIC, SSC) Creep/Stress Rupture High Temp H2/H2S Polythionic Acid Cracking Naphthenic Acid Corrosion Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion Ammonium Chloride Corrosion HCl Corrosion High Temperature H2 Attack Oxidation Thermal Fatigue Sour Water Corrosion (Acidic) Refractory Degradation Graphitization Temper Embrittlement Decarburization Caustic Cracking Caustic Corrosion Erosion/Erosion Corrosion Carbonate SCC Amine Cracking Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC) Carburization Hydrogen Embrittlement Steam Blanketing Thermal Shock Cavitation Graphitic (see De-alloying) Short Term Overheating Brittle Fracture Sigma Phase Embrittlement 885°F Embrittlement Softening (Spheroidization) Reheat Cracking Sulfuric Acid Corrosion

API RP 571 # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Page 50 of 52


SA # 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

Description

Hydrofluoric Acid Corrosion Flue Gas Dew Point Corrosion Dissimilar Metal Weld (DMW) Cracking Hydrogen Induced Cracking in HF Dealloying CO2 Corrosion Corrosion Fatigue Fuel Ash Corrosion Amine Corrosion Corrosion under Insulation (CUI) Atmospheric corrosion Ammonia Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) Cooling Water Corrosion Boiler Water/Condensate Corrosion Microbiologically Induced Corrosion (MIC) Liquid Metal Embrittlement Galvanic Corrosion Mechanical Fatigue Nitriding Vibration Induced Fatigue Titanium Hydriding Soil Corrosion Metal Dusting Strain Aging Sulfate Stress Corrosion Cracking Phosphoric Corrosion Phenol (carbolic acid) Corrosion Ethanol Stress Corrosion Cracking Oxygen-enhanced Ignition and Combustion Organic Acid Corrosion of Distilled Tower Overhead S ystem General Corrosion Pitting Corrosion Crevice Corrosion Sweet Corrosion Weight Loss Sour Corrosion Acid Corrosion (Acidization) Oxygen Corrosion Elastomer Failure

API RP 571 # 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Page 51 of 52


SA # 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

Description

API RP 571 #

Heat Checking Thread Failure (Mech. F) Tensile Overload (Mech. F) Collapse (Mech. F) Top of the line Corrosion Under-deposit Corrosion Acid Condensate Corrosion Elemental Sulfur Corrosion Casing Wear Fretting Corrosion Overlay Disbonding

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

This color denoted that the damage mechanism narrative is under development.

Page 52 of 52

SABP-A-033.pdf

Recommend Documents