Evaluation of asset integrity management system...

GUIDE

Evaluation of asset integrity management system (AIMS)

Evaluation of asset integrity management system (AIMS) – guide

Reference

The recommended reference for this publication is: Department of Mines and Petroleum, 2012, Evaluation of asset integrity management system (AIMS) – guide: Resources Safety, Department of Mines and Petroleum, Western Australia, 23 pp.

ISBN 978 1 921163 98 2

© Department of Mines and Petroleum 2012

Except where the Copyright Act otherwise allows, reproduction in whole or part of this publication will be permitted only with the prior written permission of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. Applications for permission should be addressed to the Communications Manager, Resources Safety.

This publication is also available in digital format (PDF) online at www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

Further details of publications produced by Resources Safety can be obtained by contacting:

Resources Safety — Publications Department of Mines and Petroleum 100 Plain Street EAST PERTH WA 6004

Telephone +61 8 9358 8002 (general queries) +61 8 9358 8154 (publication orders)

NRS 13 36 77 Facsimile +61 8 9358 8000 Email [email protected] (general queries)

[email protected] (publication orders)

Disclaimer

The information contained in this publication is provided in good faith and believed to be reliable and accurate at the time of publication. However, the information is provided on the basis that the reader will be solely responsible for assessing the information and its veracity and usefulness.

The State shall in no way be liable, in negligence or howsoever, for any loss sustained or incurred by anyone relying on the information, even if such information is or turns out to be wrong, incomplete, out-of-date or misleading.

In this disclaimer:

State means the State of Western Australia and includes every Minister, agent, agency, department, statutory body corporate and instrumentality thereof and each employee or agent of any of them.

Information includes information, data, representations, advice, statements and opinions, expressly or implied set out in this publication.

Loss includes loss, damage, liability, cost, expense, illness and injury (including death).

iv

ForewordAn asset integrity management system (AIMS) allows operators, particularly those with large-scale petroleum facilities, to demonstrate that, as far as is reasonably practicable, they have ensured the integrity of their assets.

This guide is based on Departmental tools for assessment of safety system documentation. It comprises a section answering frequently asked questions in relation to managing the integrity of assets for petroleum operations, a checklist to help operators evaluate an AIMS, and a series of diagrams and information to help operators develop an effective AIMS.

Other resources

Further information on asset integrity is available at:

www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/knowledgecentre/AssetIntegrity.cfm

www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/415.pdf

www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/knowledgecentre/AssetIntegrity.cfm

www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/415.pdf

Contents

Foreword ...................................................................................................................... iv

1 Frequently asked questions ........................................................................................2

2 AIMS evaluation checklist ...........................................................................................5

Overview ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

Considerations ............................................................................................................................................. 5

3 Guidance.................................................................................................................20

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 20

1. Fitness for purpose (FFP) graph .............................................................................................................. 20

2. Risk-based inspection (RBI) wheel .......................................................................................................... 22

3. RBI flowchart ........................................................................................................................................ 23

Evaluation of asset integrity management system (AIMS) – guide2

1 Frequently asked questions

The information provided below is for guidance only, and is not a substitute for reading the relevant occupational health and safety legislation for petroleum operations in Western Australia.

Q.Q What is integrity?

Q.A Integrity, sometimes referred to as fitness for purpose (FFP), can be defined as

• the ability of an asset to perform its required function effectively and efficiently

while

• safeguarding the safety and health of persons engaged in an operation, other protected persons, and the environment

by

• the reduction of hazards and risks

– to a level as low as reasonably practical in normal operating conditions

or

– in an emergency, to an extent as specified in the safety management system of an operation, or as well as could reasonably be expected in an emergency situation.

The related management activities ensure that the people, systems, processes, procedures, resources and plans to deliver integrity are in place, in use, and fit for purpose over the whole lifecycle of the asset.

Q.Q Is there any legislation relating to the integrity of petroleum operations?

Q.A In relation to integrity, specific requirements (e.g. structural integrity) under the Petroleum Pipelines (Management of Safety of Pipeline Operations) Regulations 2010, Petroleum (Submerged Lands) (Management of Safety of Offshore Facilities) Regulations 2007 and Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources (Management of Safety) Regulations 2010 call for structures, machinery, electrical systems and instrumentation controls at an operation to be kept in good condition and be fit for purpose.

Other regulations are applied in relation to integrity regarding duties, obligations, responsibilities, supporting documentation, methods and practices involved in the implementation and ongoing management of an asset integrity management system, which are part of the overall safety management system.

Q.Q What are some examples of the application of the regulations?

Q.A The regulatory requirements relevant to the integrity of petroleum operations are summarised below.

Generalised content of a safety case or safety management system that relates to:

• several pages in Schedule 1 of the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969 and Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967, and Schedule 5 of the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 regarding operator, employer, obligations, duties, and responsibilities acknowledgement (e.g. policy statement)

• the systems and procedures to be employed (e.g. permit to work or PTW, safety operating procedures or SOPs, document control)

• the performance and ongoing maintenance of the systems and procedures initiated (e.g. audits, reviews, key performance indicators or KPIs, technical change management)

Hazards, inspection, testing and maintenance:

• identification of hazards (e.g. PTW, job hazard safety analysis or JHSA, risk assessment)

• inspection, testing and maintenance (e.g. inspection, maintenance and repair or IMR; corrosion maintenance inspection or CMI; safety critical function test or SCFT)

3Evaluation of asset integrity management system (AIMS) – guide

Implementation and improvement:

• implementation and ongoing improvement (e.g. AIMS, technical change management)

• identification of deficiencies (e.g. audit, KPIs, reviews)

Skills, training and ability:

• tasks that may reasonably be given (i.e. AIM manager job description form or JDF)

Co-ordination and control of safe performance of all work:

• persons to authorise and supervise work (e.g. PTW, JHSA, SOPs and policies)

Note: In some instances, other sections within the case for safety will have already dealt with these subjects. For example, the policy integrity statement may be a separate policy solely addressing integrity, but usually the company’s occupational safety and health policy statement will suffice. The same applies to PTW, SOPs and JHSAs, which may be covered in the case for safety section detailing a “system for the safe performance of work”.

Q.Q The level of documentation required to cover integrity appears to be quite substantialQ. What do I need to provide in an SMS submission for acceptance by the Minister?

Q.A The level of documentation detailed in an SMS should be appropriate for the size, scope, complexity, and level of risk for an operation. For integrity, this may range from a few paragraphs for small operations with a low level of risk, through to several pages for large, complex facilities or operations with a much higher level of risk.

Q.Q Using examples of components or considerations relating to asset integrity management , when would a paragraph or two on integrity suffice as opposed to several pages in a case for safety?

A1Q. A paragraph or two

In a simple low-risk operation, an asset register is created and populated on a simple electronic maintenance management system (MMS) covering all assets of the operation or facility. Using a pressure vessel as an example, the vessel’s details are recorded in the asset register, its inspection frequency and type are established in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 3788:2006 Pressure equipment – In-service inspection (the hazard rating determines the inspection intervals for internal and external inspections if and when required) and this information is entered into the MMS.

When the vessel is close to the inspection date, the system “flags” the vessel with a work order and inspection SOPs and/or checklists and procedures are generated. The tasks are then carried out according to the system for the safe performance of work (PTW, JHSA, SOPs and policy), with a record of the subsequent findings, repairs, corrosion rates and other outcomes retained in electronic and/or hard copy format once the vessel is found to satisfy FFP requirements and returned to service. The next inspection date is entered into the MMS.

A2Q. Several pages

Large-scale operations of far greater complexity may have several plans that fall under the AIMS, and therefore require a brief summary of each plan, and its respective components where applicable.

Components that might be considered when determining an appropriate AIMS are listed below.

Note: Some of the items have the same intent but have acquired different names and acronyms during industry use.

Methodologies

• Reliability-centred maintenance (RCM)

• Risk-based inspection (RBI)

• Planned maintenance inspection (PMI)

Plans and systems

• Corrosion management, inspection and repair (CMIR)

• Corrosion monitoring inspection (CMI)

• Corrosion monitoring inspection plan (CMIP)

• Structural integrity management system (SIMS)

• Pipeline integrity management system (PIMS)

• Pipeline management plan (PMP)

• Safety critical function maintenance and testing management system (SCFT)

• Safety critical element management (SCEM)

• Well operations management plan (WOMP)

• Field development plan (FDP)

Procedures and checklists

• Vessel inspection procedures

• Intelligent pigging procedure, selection and reporting

• Corrosion monitoring inspection procedure

• Safety critical element checklists (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually)

• Safety critical function testing procedure

• SOPs (including elements from machinery manuals)

Note: Items such as document control, change management, policy, training registers and permits to work are covered under other sections of the case for safety.

• Piping anomaly management procedure

• Technical change management procedure

• Integrity management personnel and competencies

• Well integrity inspections and testing procedures


2 AIMS evaluation checklist

Overview

Documentation isQ.Q.Q. Y/N Comments

Easy to read – format and layout clear

Quick to reference – check reference several aspects at random

Concise – clear and to the point

Minimal narrative – use of bullet points in checklists; use of tables and flowcharts in preference to wordy explanations

Considerations

AIMS evaluation and considerations Y/N Comments (N/A – not applicable)

1 Document control and preface

1.1 Document control register

1.2 Table of document name, document number, edition, version, date issued

1.3 Distribution list

1.4 Revision procedure

2 Contents

2.1 Plan structure – diagram format

2.2 Table of contents

2.3 List of figures, charts and tables

3 Introduction

3.1 Purpose

3.2 Scope

3.2.1 Integration or relationship of plans:

• corrosion management inspection and repair

• planned maintenance inspection

• risk-based inspection

• reliability-centred maintenance

3.2.2 Integration with other company plans

3.3 Objectives

3.4 Location details



4 General

4.1 The AIMS addresses the following main elements as a minimum:

• corrosion management inspection and repair (e.g. vessels, pipelines, instrumentation)

• safety critical elements (e.g. emergency shut down and isolation equipment, fire protection and detection for plant and equipment)

• instrumented protective functions

• planned maintenance inspection and repair, and fitness-for-purpose (e.g. mobile plant)

• well head and subsurface well integrity

4.2 The AIMS delegates duties, responsibilities, authorities and accountabilities with respect to its development and implementation.

4.3 The AIMS demonstrates that any future development or activities can be addressed

4.4 All relevant personnel have access to relevant AIMS documentation and records

4.5 The AIMS incorporates or links to a quality management system as a mechanism for assisting in meeting the AIMS performance standards or key performance indicators (KPIs). KPIs should be readily available from the AIMS, such as:

• percentage of programme completed

• months of backlog

• backlog of critical items

• percentage emergency work

• weekly schedule compliance

KPIs are regularly reviewed by supervisors and managers. Reports of outstanding critical maintenance and other exception reports are approved by the manager responsible for facility integrity

5 Facility or operation description

5.1 General

5.1.1 The facility or operation is sufficiently described to allow a clear understanding of the purpose of the asset and its activities and the controls in place to ensure that risks are managed to as low as reasonably practicable



5.1.2 The description includes as a minimum, where applicable:

• the physical controls in place to ensure that identified risks are managed to as low as reasonably practicable

• key parties and responsibilities

• the geographical location and a site location plan

• key crossings

• environment description (e.g. oil, gas, sweet, sour)

• flora and fauna

• site meteorological conditions

• geotechnical considerations

• interaction with existing facilities

5.1.3 There is an overview of key plant and utilities, including:

• lighting

• water

• fuel supply

• power

• communications

• fire protection, suppression and detection

• office and control rooms

• processing, storage and handling areas

6 Policy leadership, commitment and strategy

6.1 General

6.1.1 There is a documented policy with strategic objectives for managing the integrity of the facility that:

• is clear, specific and useable by the workforce

• defines objectives, strategies, plan, performance standards, performance indicators and continuous improvement strategy

• clearly identifies systems, assets and equipment to be monitored by specific programmes, including on-line inspection

• clearly defines the process of validation and verification against regulatory requirements



6.1.2 Mechanisms are in place to ensure the accountability of senior management for the achievement of asset integrity management, such as:

• facility integrity is part of operator’s overall business management system

• top management regularly reviews the technical health of the facility and effectiveness of its monitoring

• every level of workforce has access to relevant integrity information and regular briefings by management

6.1.3 •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Integrity assessment procedures and guidelines are in place, such as pipeline integrity management system

structural integrity management system

technical change management system

maintenance management manual

inspection and corrosion engineering manual

small bore piping integrity manual

safety critical function maintenance and testing management system

asset information system (documented asset register)

well head and subsurface well integrity management



6.1.4 There is a documented maintenance strategy or plan that is derived from the policy for maintenance of systems and equipment, and is clear and actionable and includes:

• risk-based decision making to set appropriate maintenance options (i.e. preventive, predictive and run to failure)

• reliability-centred maintenance concept applied (i.e. focus on systems and equipment with safety consequences and frequent failure)

• describes the resources provided to achieve the plan, and how they are provided

• describes how maintenance performance is monitored and measured

• describes how technical support is provided, and from whom

• defines safety critical elements

• specifies the process for identifying safety critical elements and their corresponding performance standards in preventing or mitigating the initiation of a major accident event

Note: Safety critical elements are any part of the facility, plant or computer programmes whose failure will either cause or contribute to a major accident, or the purpose of which is to prevent or limit the effect of a major accident

6.1.5 Periodic review of the AIMS are scheduled to ensure its relevance and that objectives are met

6.2 Organisation and responsibility

6.2.1 All personnel involved in the AIMS are informed of their roles, responsibilities and accountabilities such that:

• the custodian of facility integrity is clearly identified, with job description and authority

• the roles, responsibilities and communication between the operations, maintenance and technical integrity group are clear

• the roles and responsibilities of other personnel such as support staff, contractors and specialists are unambiguous

6.2.2 Key personnel have signed off on their understanding of their AIMS roles, responsibilities and accountabilities

6.2.3 Responsibilities and accountabilities under the AIMS are reviewed regularly and when with organisational changes are made



6.2.4 The AIMS responsibilities and accountabilities of all personnel align with their skills and training:

• key personnel involved in safeguarding the facility integrity are identified

• there is a procedure for identifying the training needs of these personnel, and a training or skills matrix

• there are competency requirements for personnel responsible for specific areas of integrity safeguarding such as corrosion or erosion, pressure system, pipework and safety critical elements

• specific skills that are outsourced are identified, and the work output and performance monitoring approach described

• external accreditation required for specific skills of personnel (own and contractors) is defined

• there is a competency assessment procedure

• personnel are trained in root cause analysis, HAZID, HAZOP and risk management

• training records are maintained and audited

6.2.5 Interface between key personnel is clearly defined

6.3 Employee involvement and communication

6.3.1 “Front line” maintenance technicians are consulted when assessing risk, problem solving and devising maintenance work schedules and procedures:

• they are involved in task risk assessments (e.g. job safety analyses or JSAs) and the provision of feedback to improve procedures

• they are involved in devising work schedules as required



6.3.2 Maintenance issues are discussed between the site-based technicians or supervisors and office-based support staff

There is a daily communication protocol between site frontline staff and office-based support staff

There is a mechanism for problems encountered on site by the technicians to be discussed and resolved with office based support staff

Contact can be made:

• daily for immediate issues

• monthly for planning purposes

• quarterly and annually for medium- and long-term planning

7 Planning: responsibility, hazard identification and risk management

7.1 General

7.1.1 Plans and procedures are in place to achieve the strategic objectives of safeguarding the facility integrity, such as:

• clear identification of critical activities and threats to integrity

• integrity management manual

• plan and procedures for inspection, audits and change management

• methodologies defined (i.e. risk-based inspections, reliability-centred maintenance, instrumented protective function)

• clear process for defining safety critical elements and their performance standards, plans and procedures for each type of asset, equipment or system (e.g. pipe work, pressure system, corrosion and erosion, structures)

7.1.2 Assumptions made within the AIMS are justified and backed by relevant information

7.1.3 Risk assessments are based on, and reference, appropriate standards (e.g. risk-based inspection - API 581)

Note: See Part 3 of this guideline for simplified guidance on fitness-for-purpose and risk-based inspection



7.2 Objectives, plans and performance standards

7.2.1 The AIMS objectives, plans and standards are defined and verifiable, such as:

• pipeline integrity management system

• structural integrity management system

• technical change management system

• maintenance management manual

• inspection and corrosion engineering manual

• small bore piping integrity manual

• safety critical function maintenance and testing management system

• asset information system

• well head and subsurface well integrity management

7.2.2 The AIMS objectives, plans and standards reflect the responsibilities, legislative requirements and AIMS commitments

7.2.3 Plans are updated to reflect changes in performance standards, or outcomes of appraisals of the AIMS effectiveness

8 Safe operating procedures

8.1 Deferral of safety critical elements

8.1.1 There are procedures or documentation describing how deferrals are authorised and justified, and ensuring:

• any deferrals of safety critical items follow the change management system of the SMS

• when a deferral is approved, it is stipulated whether that work item is still referenced as a backlog

Note: All work requests that have not been completed are “backlog” by definition

8.1.2 If maintenance of a safety critical element is deferred, the steps taken to identify and implement additional measures to restore the integrity of the barriers weakened by the deferral are described



8.1.3 Procedures and guidelines are in place for temporary measures or repairs, and are subject to an engineering assessment and given a “defined life” prior to implementation

When temporary measures are put in place, they must be limited to a specified time period and authorised in accordance with change management procedures, including a risk assessment.

Note: Any change in the design of safety critical systems or equipment must be subject to change management system procedures and authorisation levels

A work order is generated on the maintenance scheduling software to record the defined life and to schedule when the temporary repair should be inspected, maintained and replaced with a conventional repair within the defined life

8.2 Maintenance and repair

8.2.1 A program has been developed and implemented on site for the routine inspection and maintenance of plant and equipment

8.2.2 Inspection and maintenance schedules are in place and are in line with manufacturers’ and legislative requirements, work practices and recommendations

8.2.3 Planned maintenance activities are conducted in line with procedures contained within the AIMS and:

• there is a mechanism to prioritise maintenance tasks, and any differences between the priorities for corrective maintenance and those for planned maintenance are identified

• work orders are screened for matters such as scope, planning and parts availability

• risk assessment methodology is applied consistently to determine the time frame within which safety critical work is to be completed

• safety critical work that is not completed by the nominated “required by date” is the subject of an exception report requiring management approval

• priority is given to corrective maintenance that is necessary to avoid serious safety consequences



8.2.4 A process is in place to ensure that safety critical elements are identified and maintenance scheduled accordingly, and scheduled maintenance is prioritised with consideration for the safety and integrity impact of equipment, such as:

• critical function tests based on a checklist with acceptance parameters

• safety critical element acceptance criteria laid out in written schemes of examination (WSE)

• performance measures in integrity manuals for security critical elements or critical function testing

• performance standards defining the minimum acceptable standards for a safety critical element in terms of functionality, reliability or availability, and survivability

• failed functions not immediately repaired being the subject of a management-of-change report for sign off by the operation’s person in charge, with contingency measures in place for safe operation inclusive of an appropriate risk assessment

• separate reports for the backlog of safety critical elements and equipment that is not safety critical

8.2.5 Procedures are in place for the periodic review of maintenance procedures to ensure:

• maintenance is being undertaken and equipment is safe and fit for purpose before being returned to service

• potential improvements to the maintenance process are identified

• work is undertaken in accordance with documented procedures

• safety critical procedures include a checklist to be filed on completion

• the AIMS maintenance system includes performance monitoring arrangements with agreed performance standards and performance indicators

• office support staff analyse, monitor and verify the maintenance performance against appropriate key performance indicators, and these prompt queries and discussion between site- and office-based staff for compliance and continuous improvement



8.2.6 The AIMS plant and equipment register is used to record plant and equipment inspections, maintenance, repairs or modifications

8.2.7 Operations vehicles and plant are inspected by operations-authorised drivers or operators, and the results are recorded in a logbook

8.2.8 Plant or equipment found to be defective or dangerous is taken out of service and tagged as “out of service” until such time as a qualified technician has made suitable repairs or the equipment is replaced

8.2.9 Appropriate procedures and training are in place to ensure all maintenance activities and tasks are conducted in line with the AIMS

8.2.10 There is a documented procedure to ensure that defective or dangerous plant and equipment is reported

If equipment is allowed to continue operating when it is known to be defective (e.g. a passing valve), there are procedures in place to identify what other barriers and defences need to be implemented to compensate.

Note: A risk assessment is required to arrive at mitigating measures for continued operation

8.3 Employee selection competency and training

8.3.1 A competency and skills matrix defines the competency criteria and safety attributes of each position

8.3.2 Evidence of statutory competencies is required for relevant positions and copies of certificates are retained on site

8.3.3 There is a process to capture the review of position specifications

8.3.4 All personnel are aware of their roles and responsibilities upon commencement of employment

8.3.5 Employee competence is assessed as part of a periodic performance review

8.3.6 Training programs are adequately funded and reviewed, and reassessed periodically to ensure effectiveness



8.4 Workplace environment

8.4.1 The project management team has developed the AIMS to ensure and promote a safe working environment

9 Inspection, testing, monitoring and reporting

9.1 General

9.1.1 There are processes covering the inspection, testing and monitoring of site activities, plant and equipment for the operation, including:

• procedures for ensuring plant is checked before use

• planned regime of workplace AIMS inspections

• work activity observations

• pre-operation inspections of vehicles and plant

• inspections and testing of electrical equipment

• inspections and testing of cranes and lifting equipment

• inspections and testing of pressure vessels and pressure testing equipment

• inspections and testing of emergency, first aid, fire and spill control equipment

• inspections and testing of well integrity

9.1.2 Inspections follow an agreed format and are documented

9.1.3 A corrective action register prioritises, tracks and closes-out actions and improvements

10 Audit, verification, review and improvement

10.1 Asset integrity audit

10.1.1 The audit and review approach of the AIMS is demonstrated through:

• key performance indicators used in daily and monthly operations reports

• monthly facility integrity reports

• monthly facility technical change reports

• validation and verification schemes

• regular internal and external audits and reviews



10.1.2 The system and program of AIMS audits includes both internal and independent audits

10.1.3 The AIMS audits enable verification that the AIMS arrangements meet specified performance standards and allow opportunities for system improvement to be identified

10.1.4 The methodology for conducting AIMS audits is described, including:

• scope and objectives

• criteria for selection of audit teams and leaders

• reporting requirements

10.1.5 The AIMS audits are conducted by suitably competent personnel and the AIMS personnel are involved, and:

• there is a policy and procedure for facility integrity audit

• the planning for audits is described, including whether they are based on the status and importance of the activity

• the selection of personnel to conduct each audit is described

• independent competent persons are used for audits and verification

10.1.6 Corrective actions are prioritised, assigned responsibility, and allocated expected completion dates

10.1.7 The AIMS audit findings are submitted in a formal report along with any corrective action requests to appropriate project personnel

10.1.8 Follow-up actions on audit findings are monitored for suitable resolution and timely close-out

10.1.9 The AIMS audit reports are disseminated to involved stakeholders and authorities

10.2 Review and improvement

10.2.1 A process is in place to capture corrective actions and follow-up requirements resulting from the audit or assessment, and ensure close-out in a timely manner

10.2.2 The AIMS performance is benchmarked against other organisational, operational and industry data



11 Document and record control procedures

11.1 In general, the AIMS describes whether records are centrally kept and:

• integrity records are maintained to demonstrate achievement of the performance standards of the systems and equipment

• records are maintained for non-compliances, deviations, deferrals, corrective actions and remedial measures taken

• the validation and verification results of specialist contractors are recorded

• records accessible to relevant (i.e. site and office) personnel

• the form in which the records are kept and what the retention time is

11.1.1 There is a document identification system that allows each document to be uniquely identified

11.1.2 All documents developed utilise the document identification system

11.1.3 All documents are developed in line with an agreed format

11.1.4 All documents intended solely for the operation and developed by external parties are reproduced (with consent of the external party) in line with the agreed format and identification system

11.1.5 Where a document hierarchy exists, this is detailed within the document control procedures

11.1.6 Document development is undertaken by personnel who are suitably qualified and competent

11.1.7 All documents are subject to a defined review process that includes the participation of relevant personnel

11.1.8 The review of documents is recorded either on the document master drafts or by some other means (e.g. document review register)

11.1.9 All documents are subject to a defined authorisation process that includes those peoples whose responsibility it falls under, as per the organisation structure

11.1.10 The authorisation of documents is recorded either on the document final draft or by some other means (e.g. document authorisation register)

11.1.11 Where applicable, documents include references to material gathered from other documentation, either internal or external to the operation’s organisation



11.1.12 An effective document change management process is in place to ensure that:

• changes to the operation (any internal or external factors or references) are captured in the corresponding documents

• dissemination of altered documentation is timely and effective

• relevant personnel are made aware of changes to documentation

• superseded or redundant documents are replaced at all locations on site and within the organisation

11.1.13 The document control process captures all correspondence that will, or has the potential to influence the AIMS aspects of the operation

11.1.14 Documents are marked as either controlled or uncontrolled as is applicable, and this process is managed effectively

11.1.15 Documentation is archived in accordance with statutory requirements


3 Guidance

Introduction

The three guidance diagrams included here are not suitable for all industrial applications, operations, and facilities. Care should be exercised in their use as they are only provided for guidance on the basic principles of integrity or fitness for purpose and risk-based inspection.

1Q. Fitness for purpose (FFP) graph

INST

ALLA

TION

COM

MIS

SION

ING

DECO

MM

ISSI

ONIN

G

DESI

GN L

IFE

EXTE

NSIO

N OR

PL

ANNE

D OB

SOLE

SCEN

CEINSPECTION

AND CORROSION

MONITORING

Time

DESI

GN

Periods of constant and/or random failures

Fitness for purpose

STANDARD ASSET LIFE

Schedule determined by applicable standards

Risk-based approach to determine schedule

Increased inspection and monitoring

Formulate strategies, policies, procedures and schemes for AIMS Design reappraisal Additional measures

ASSET INTEGRITY

MANAGEMENT

Failu

re fr

eque

ncy

Decreasingfailure frequency

Increasingfailure frequency

Using the FFP graph

The FPP guidance chart has many applications, including mobile plant and equipment, pumps, motors, compressors, pipelines and pressure vessels. The red line traces the typical failure frequency pathway over the life time of an asset. The following example demonstrates how the chart describes the life cycle of a pressure vessel, hazard rating 2, used on a petroleum production facility.

Before commissioning or start-up of the pressure vessel in the plant, plans should be formulated for corrosion and inspection management, inspection maintenance and repair, systems, procedures and practices. The strategy adopted for corrosion management and inspection of the pressure vessel is likely initially to be a planned maintenance schedule determined by Australian Standards, moving to a risk-based inspection (RBI) schedule once sufficient operational data are available to support the decision-making process.


The pressure vessel will be subject to design reappraisal when considering a change from planned inspection and monitoring intervals as referenced in Australian Standard AS/NZS 3788:2006 Pressure equipment – In-service inspection to RBI intervals. For the pressure vessel in this example, the change to an RBI regime will not occur for at least five years, after the vessel has been inspected at commissioning, and there have been internal inspections after one year and then a further four years of operation. After this five-year period, the following information will be available, allowing an informed decision to be made about whether to retain the standards-based inspection and monitoring regime, or decrease or increase the intervals under an RBI approach.

• The vessel walls will have undergone baseline ultrasonic testing (UT), with documented results.

• Quality assurance or quality control (QA /QC) design and/or fabrication flaws (if any) will have been detected and repaired.

• Non-destructive test (NDT) results will have been established for corrosion rate calculations.

• The suitability of design and materials for operational conditions will have been confirmed (refer to sections 4.4.3 and 4.4.4.1 of AS/NZS 3788:2006 for guidance).

• Design excursions (e.g. levels above and below design pressures, temperature, sweet to sour transition) and operational history will have been established.

The inspection frequencies determined at the project inception and/or design reappraisal stages may need to be increased when:

• the remaining life assessment is conducted following completion of 60 per cent of the design life. Where no design life is evident, refer to section 5.1 of AS/NZS 3788:2006 for guidance (e.g. 100,000 operating hours or second inspection interval)

• the failure or repair rates increase

• the vessel sustains damage.

Note: Wastage rates are considered to be the controlling factor in pressure vessel life expectancy, and may be determined from UT readings over a period of time (refer to section 4.4.4.2 of AS/NZS 3788:2006 for guidance).

To extend the design life of the pressure vessel, additional measures may be required in the form of additional safety equipment, procedures, practices, inspections, monitoring, testing, revisions of recommended practices and standards, and analysis and calculation of the rates of corrosion, fatigue, creep and hydrogen attack if the vessel is re-lifed.

At some point, a finite asset life is achieved when the key performance indicators (e.g. frequency of failure at inspection, number of repairs, wastage) reach levels that are considered to be intolerable, with associated risks and hazards not being as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). The asset is then decommissioned.


2Q. Risk-based inspection (RBI) wheel

11. Feedback 1. Review

10. Verification

9. Define

8. Statement7.

Reporting

5.

Inspection

4. RBI matrices

3. Development

6. Data

2. Design

reappraisal

RISK ASSESSMENT

RISK-BASED IN

SPEC

TION

RISK MANAGEM

ENT

FEEDBACK

Using the RBI wheel

1. Undertake historical review (e.g. inspection records, repairs, corrosion rates, damage).

2. Reappraise design (e.g. in-service records, planned and unplanned shut-downs and start-ups, pressure and temperature excursions and durations over and below original design operational parameters).

3. Assess and develop systems, procedures, practices and plans.

4. Develop RBI matrices (see page 21).

5. Carry out non-destructive testing (NDT) and inspections on assets such as plant, equipment, vessels and pipelines.

6. Interpret data acquired, compare with baseline NDT results and inspections, populate database and analyse findings.

7. Report on interpretations, produce required action lists in order of criticality.

8. Produce statements on corrosion condition and integrity of assets.

9. Define the solutions for FFP inspection frequency, methodology and practices.

10. Third party to verify RBI process, methodology, techniques and data.

11. Feed lessons learned back into the system.


3Q. RBI flowchart

D = diameter P = pressure T = temperature V = volume v = velocity

RS

DJu

l12_

808

Resources Safety Department of Mines and Petroleum 100 Plain Street EAST PERTH WA 6004

Telephone +61 8 9222 3597 NRS 13 36 77 Facsimile +61 8 9222 3383 Email [email protected] Website www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

Evaluation of asset integrity management system...

Documents

Transcript of Evaluation of asset integrity management system...