SABP-A-033 Materials & Corrosion Control Standards

Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: TBD

Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin of 52

Primary contacts: Sami M. Al-Ghamdi on 880-9573 and/or Abdelhak Kermad on 880-9529

Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.

Best Practice

SABP-A-033 30 March 2013

Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual

Document Responsibility: Materials and Corrosion Control Standards Committee

Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards

Table of Contents

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 Information Required…………. 33 Appendix 2 - Corrosion Loops Development…….. 35 Appendix 3 - CMP Checklist for Self and Central Engineering Reviews……..….. 37

Part 2: “Manage Corrosion” Work Processes…...... 42

Introduction………………………………………. 43 Attachment 1 - “Manage Corrosion” at Design.….. 47 Attachment 2 - “Manage Corrosion” at Procurement and Construction………..... 47 Attachment 3 - “Manage Corrosion” at Operate and Maintain……………………. 47 Attachment 4 - “Manage Corrosion” at Decommissioning………………………… 47

Part 3: Damage Mechanism Narratives………..…… 48

Introduction……………………………..……….. 49

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

of 52

Foreword

Corrosion 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” 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” and “how 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”, SAEP-122 “Project Records” and SAES-L-133 “Corrosion Protection

Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process 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”, will result in “critical

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.

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Saep&committee_id=124&sm=SAEP-14


https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Saes&committee_id=20&sm=SAES-L-133




of 52

CMP development follows the “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” is “strategize”. The plans developed

must then be followed through or implemented. Another term for “do” is “implement”. Once the

plans have been put into action, checks must be carried 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”. 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” is “rectify” or “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 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 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 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.




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 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







https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Saes&committee_id=20&sm=SAES-A-007

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Saes&committee_id=8&sm=SAES-H-001





https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Saes&committee_id=12&sm=SAES-W-011

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Best_Practices&committee_id=20&sm=SABP-A-001












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

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

1.2 Industry Codes and Standards

American Petroleum Institute

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

1.3 Publications

Saudi Aramco Safety Management System, Loss Prevention Department

Qualitative Risk Assessment, Guide Number 02-002-2010, Saudi Aramco Safety

Management Guide, Loss Prevention Department, 24 July 2010





https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/mycommittee.asp?fol=Engineering_Reports&committee_id=133&sm=SAER-2365












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 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 developed corrosion loops.

Corrosion Management Program (CMP): Corporate Program developed by

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 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 drill-

down 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 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.




of 52

Part 1: Basic Requirements and Deployment Activities




of 52

1 Introduction

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

follows:

● Part 1: Basic Requirements and Deployment Activities

● Part 2: “Manage Corrosion” Work Processes

● Part 3: Damage Mechanism Narratives

1.1 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:

● Improved plant integrity and safety

● Reduced corrosion failures

● Maximum plant availability

● Optimized mitigation, monitoring and inspection expenditure

● Reduced loss profit opportunity

1.2 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, vibration-

induced cracking, sigma phase embrittlement, dissimilar metal weld

cracking, brittle fracture, etc.

● Uniform or localized thinning – galvanic corrosion, caustic corrosion, CO2

corrosion, amine corrosion, corrosion-under-insulation, microbiologically-

induced corrosion, etc.




of 52

● High temperature corrosion – sulfidic corrosion, oxidation, carburization,

metal dusting, fuel ash corrosion, etc.

● Environmental-assisted cracking – 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” 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) is based on

the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) model for the management of safety-

related activity.




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 to

policies, objectives, organizational structure/responsibilities, 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.

Policy &Strategies

Organization& Responsibilities

Planning& Implementation

PerformanceMeasurement

Review ofPerformance

Risk Assessment

SatisfactoryPerformance

Review, CorrectUpdate

Successful Corrosion Management

Yes No

Best PracticesEngineering StandardsIndustry Standards

AccountabilitiesCompetencyTraining

Likelihood & ConsequencesCriticality

Inspection & Maintenance PlansCorrosion Management Strategy

Monitor TrendsAnomaly TrackingKey Performance Indicators

Managementof Change

Review

Figure 2 - Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Framework




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 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 non-

compliance 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.




of 52

● 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 measure

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 and 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.

2.2 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




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” 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 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 of training, coaching and mentoring to reach specialist development status

after a period of approximately 10 years; this is achieved through the Specialist

Development Program (SDP). Training 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




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”

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” invariably leads to improved asset integrity and

personnel safety.




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 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.

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




of 52

Proponent

● Corrosion

● Inspection / OSI

● Risk Based Inspection Coordination

● Process & Operations

● Technical Support

Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Champion

(CSD/ME&CCD Division Head)

CMP Team Leader

Corrosion Specialist

Materials & Welding Specialist

Coatings Specialist

Chemical & Water Treatment Specialist

Cathodic Protection Specialist

Plant CMP Leader

Plant Corrosion Engineer

Plant Inspection Engineer/OSI Coordinator

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.




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 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 of CMP to other units.




of 52

● 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.

4 Deployment Methodology

CMP deployment must follow the “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 mechanisms, performance measures, corrosion management strategies,

technologies and recommendations. This database also serves as a tracking system for

reviews and recommendation implementation.

Deployment activities are listed below (Figure 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)

● Plan logistics

● Request plant information (Appendix 1)

o Asset list; critical equipment list

o Inspection history, post-T&I reports

o Process Description, PFDs, P&IDs

o Material Selection Diagrams (MSDs), corrosion circuits, corrosion

monitoring reports

o Chemical injection/treatment programs, controls and historical

performance data from chemical alliance




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:

o CMP Objectives

o CMP Methodology and Benefits

o CMP Strategies

o CMP Framework

o CMP Deliverable – Unit-specific Corrosion Control Document

o Deployment Plan

o Proponent Requirements

o CMP Deployment Timeline

4.2 Deployment

4.2.1 Work Process Gap Analysis

Perform “Operate & Maintain” work process gap analysis, 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” 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” work processes for

“operate & maintain” include the following:




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:

● Major corrosion challenges

● Inspection/Repair/Replacement failure history

● Incident investigations

● Process upsets

● Process variables

● Operational practices

4.2.3 Plant Assessment

Perform plant assessment, focusing on major corrosion challenges,

locations exhibiting corrosion classes 0 and 1 (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 T/delta P





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




of 52

● Environmental

● Reputation

Two methods are proposed to address 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 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, 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, so that its tolerability can be judged.

Figure 6 - Risk Matrix




of 52

Table 1 - Likelihood / Frequency

Table 2 - Severity / Consequence




of 52

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

4.2.5 Corrosion Loops (Appendix 2)

Develop corrosion loops as follows:

● 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

4.2.6 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




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




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.




of 52

Figure 7 - CMP Deployment Chart




of 52

Table 4 - Vice President CMP Dashboard VP Dashboard

# Performance

MeasureTimescale Target Method

GT#

1

GT#

2

GT#

3

GT#

4Deviation Impact

1

% of RBI studies

completed compared

to plan

Yearly 100% Operating Plan Integrity, Safety

2

Lost Profit

Opportunity (LPO)

resulting from

Corrosion Failures

Yearly 0Manufacturing &

PlanningProfitability

Table 5 - Manager CMP Dashboard Manager Dashboard

# Performance


GT#

1

GT#

2

GT#

3

GT#

4Deviation Impact

1

% of RBI studies

completed compared

to plan


2

Lost Profit

Opportunity (from

corrosion failures)

($MM)

Semi-

annually 0

Manufacturing &

Planning Profitability

3Corrosion Failures

(critical) (#)

Semi-

annually 0 Inspection Report

Mechanical Integrity, Plant

Utilization, Plant Availability

Table 6 - Superintendent CMP Dashboard Superintendent Dashboard

# Performance


GT#

1

GT#

2

GT#

3

GT#

4Deviation Impact

1

% of RBI studies

completed compared

to plan


2

Lost Profit

Opportunity (from

corrosion failures)

($MM)

Semi-

annually 0

Manufacturing &


3Corrosion Failures

(critical) (#)

Semi-




4PIWs within Limits

(%)Daily 100 PIW Dashboard PIW Dashboard

5TMLs > 5MPY (Class

0, 1, 2) (%)Quarterly 0 UT Scanning

Erosion-Corrosion, Amine

Corrosion, General

Corrosion, Under-Deposit

Corrosion, Sour Water

Corrosion




of 52

Table 7 - Supervisor/Engineer CMP Dashboard Supervisor/Engineer Dashboard

# Performance


GT#

1

GT#

2

GT#

3

GT#

4Deviation Impact

1

% of RBI studies

completed compared

to plan


2

Lost Profit

Opportunity (from

corrosion failures)

($MM)

Semi-

annually 0

Manufacturing &


3Corrosion Failures

(critical) (#)

Semi-




4PIWs within Limits

(%)Daily 100 PIW Dashboard PIW Dashboard

5TMLs > 5MPY (Class

0, 1, 2) (%)Quarterly 0 UT Scanning

Erosion-Corrosion, Amine

Corrosion, General

Corrosion, Under-Deposit

Corrosion, Sour Water

Corrosion

6

Sour Feed Gas

Throughput

(MMSCFD)

Daily550

(max)Flow Meter Erosion-Corrosion

7Lean DGA Strength

(%)Monthly 50

Acid-Base

TitrationAmine Corrosion

8Rich DGA Strength

(%)Monthly 50

Acid-Base

TitrationAmine Corrosion

9Lean DGA Acid Gas

Loading (mole/mole)Monthly 0.07

Amine Corrosion, Amine

SCC

10Rich DGA Acid Gas

Loading (mole/mole)Monthly 0.4

Amine Corrosion, Amine

SCC

11 Oxygen in DGA (ppb) Monthly 5 Oxygen Sensor Amine Corrosion

12 pH of Lean DGA Monthly 9.5 pH Meter Amine Corrosion

(1) Mainly Sea Water Chemical Treatment

Significant (negative) deviation from target

Moderate (negative) deviation from target

Compliance with or exceeds target




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.




of 52

5.2 Self Review

5.2.1 Perform CMP self-review after 2 years from the first deployment and

every 2 years thereafter, using check-list (Appendix 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. Asset condition/integrity

ii. Proactive performance detection

iii. 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.

6 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 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.

6.2 Reviews shall be carried out in accordance with the checklist given in Appendix 3

and on the basis of objective evidence of compliance.




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.

Revision Summary

30 March 2013 New Saudi Aramco Best Practice.




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 piping/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




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 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




of 52

Appendix 2 - Corrosion Loops Development

A1. Definition

A corrosion loop (CL) is a section of a plant 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’

Corrosion Management Program, as mandated in SAES-L-133 “Corrosion Protection

Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process 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 major units within their facilities.





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 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-6353, SAER-6384, SAER-6403, and SAER-6416).

Figure A1 - Example Corrosion Loop Diagram (CLD)








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 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.

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 activity, e.g., chemical vendor, should be subject to this

review.

A4. Self-reviews shall be 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 of both operational and

functional teams that are directly involved in implementing the CMP for the facility

concerned.

A7. 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.

A8. 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.

A9. 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.

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 towards close out.




of 52

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?

A2 Are you aware of the Corrosion Management Program policy defined in the CMP Manual?

B. Corrosion Competency

B1 Is there a trained and experienced corrosion engineer at your facility?

B2 Are you using a Competency Map (CMap) to monitor development, training and competency of your corrosion engineer?

B3 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?




of 52


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 Does your facility trend corrosion rate data and report this to management on a regular basis, e.g., monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, annually?

D9 Has your facility developed and makes use of Plant Integrity Windows to monitor corrosion management performance?

E. Chemical Treatment

E1 Does your facility monitor chemical and water injection rates and correlate with thinning/failure rates?

E2 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?




of 52


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 Does your facility apply the appropriate inspection method to the relevant damage mechanism?

G7 Are your Thickness Measurement Locations (TMLs) adequately defined and subject to periodic reviews?

H. Technology

H1 Do you think your facility has deployed sufficient/relevant technologies to manage corrosion?

I. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

I1 Has your facility developed and makes use of key performance indicators to manage corrosion failures?

J. Knowledge Management (KM)

J1 Is there a Corrosion Knowledge Management Program at your facility?




of 52


J2 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?

M2 Does your facility keep an updated corrosion-related recommendation and technical alert tracking system?

M3 Does your facility perform internal periodic corrosion reviews to monitor compliance and eliminate corrosion failures?




of 52

Part 2: “Manage Corrosion” Work Processes




of 52

Introduction

This part describes the “Manage Corrosion” work processes. Although the current CMP

Manual addresses the “operate & maintain” phase of the asset life cycle (Attachment 3), work

processes for all phases of the life cycle 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” work processes (Attachment 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” (APM).

Four strategic work processes were initially developed for the following disciplines, as depicted

below in Figure 8:

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

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

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

● Manage Operations (Process/Operations) – 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.

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. For systematic purposes, these processes are structured to follow the Plan-

Do-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.




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” 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 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).




of 52

Plant Integrity Assurance Framework

Map Key and Glossary

Work Process Symbols Work Process Hierarchy

Start / Finish

Process

Process Activity

Informed Addressee(s)

Action Addressee

Activity Number

Decision?

External

Process

Document

Record to be

maintained

2Off-page Reference for

Navigation

SAIF

SAIF Data Management

System

SAP

SAP Data Management

System

GWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

TWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

SWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

EWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

AWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

Global

Strategic

Tactical

Elemental

Atomic

STWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

SSWP

XX-XX

Title

SEWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

SAWP

XX-XX-XX

Title

Support Global Work

Process

Support Strategic Work

Process

Support Tactical Work

Process

Support Elemental Work

Processes

Support Atomic Work

Processes

SGWP

XX

Title

Figure 9 - Process Map Nomenclature




of 52

3

TWP-03-03-01: Plan Inspections during Procurement & Construction

SWP

03-03

Manage

Inspection

during P&C

TWP

03-03-02

Implement

Inspections

during P&C

EWP

03-03-01-01

Plan Inspection on

Supplier premises

during Fabrication

VID*/

PMT

1

EWP

03-03-01-02

Plan Inspection on

Receipt of Materials at

Aramco Construction/

Installation Site

PQM2

EWP

03-03-01-03

Plan Inspection during

Construction on

Aramco Site

PQM

/PMT

3

Plan On-Stream

Inspection during

Commissioning

OIU5

3.1.1

3.1.2

3.1.3

3.1.5

3.2

SAEP-1150

Inspection

Coverage on

Projects

OSI Administration

Inspection

Schedule

Inspection

Schedule

A

A

A

A

SAER-1972

Project Proposal/

Detailed Design

A

On-Stream

Inspection

Schedule Reports

Inspection

Schedule

Requests For

Inspection

Requests For

Inspection

Project Quality

Plan

SWP

02-03

Establish

Inspection

Strategy

Inspection

Strategy

Schedule Q

Manage QA

SA Inspection

Procedures

OIU Operations Inspection Unit

PID Projects Inspection Division

PMT SA Project Management Team

VID Vendor Inspection Division

*VID/QA for Vendor/SUP/Manufacturer qualification

VID – QC for Cat B

VID – QM for monitoring in Supplier Premises of Cat A

Supplier/

Contractor Quality

Plan

Draft SATIP

EWP

03-03-01-04

Plan Pre-

Commissioning

Inspection

PQM/

PMT

4

3.1.4

Review Certificates

and Documentation

from Supplier

VID_

QC

7

Type of

Equipment?

Cat A - MPA

Cat B

SAP

Cat C

Aramco Approval

of Equipment

Cat S

Reference of the

next process in the

sequence

This is an out-going link to the next process. This link is

not provided if the process flow returns to the parent

Incoming links for

navigation purposes

Reference link to the Strategic Process from

which this Tactical Process flows

The next level of process is an EWP

This process is a Tactical Process so label is ‘TWP’ and its title

is at the top of the page

This is a simple

step so does not

have a process

numberThis is an output

from the process

it is connected to

These are inputs

to the steps they

are linked to

Responsible for

process

Figure 10 - Process Map Items Description




of 52

Attachment 1 - “Manage Corrosion” at Design

(Double click to open the PDF document)

Adobe Acrobat Document

CorManPro Design_10 integrated 1

Attachment 2 - “Manage Corrosion” at Procurement and Construction



CorManPro_PCC_8 1

Attachment 3 - “Manage Corrosion” at Operate and Maintain



CorManPro_14 integrated 1

Attachment 4 - “Manage 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.

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/docs/SupPages/PDF/SABP-A-033A.pdf

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/docs/SupPages/PDF/SABP-A-033B.pdf

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/docs/SupPages/PDF/SABP-A-033C.pdf

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/docs/SupPages/PDF/SABP-A-033D.pdf




of 52

Part 3: Damage Mechanism Narratives




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. 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:



Damage Mechanism Narratives

Note: This 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.

https://standards.aramco.com.sa:10009/docs/SupPages/PDF/SABP-A-033E.pdf




of 52

Table 9 - Damage Mechanism Narrative List

SA # Description API RP 571 #

1 Sulfidic Corrosion (Sulfidation) 1

2 Wet H2S Damage (Blistering/HIC, SOHIC, SSC) 2

3 Creep/Stress Rupture 3

4 High Temp H2/H2S 4

5 Polythionic Acid Cracking 5

6 (NA) Naphthenic Acid Corrosion 6

7 Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion 7

8 Ammonium Chloride Corrosion 8

9 HCl Corrosion 9

10 High Temperature H2 Attack 10

11 Oxidation 11

12 Thermal Fatigue 12

13 Sour Water Corrosion (Acidic) 13

14 (NA) Refractory Degradation 14

15 Graphitization 15

16 Temper Embrittlement 16

17 Decarburization 17

18 Caustic Cracking 18

19 Caustic Corrosion 19

20 Erosion/Erosion Corrosion 20

21 Carbonate SCC 21

22 Amine Cracking 22

23 Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC) 23

24 Carburization 24

25 Hydrogen Embrittlement 25

26 Steam Blanketing 26

27 Thermal Shock 27

28 Cavitation 28

29 Graphitic (see De-alloying) 29

30 Short Term Overheating 30

31 Brittle Fracture 31

32 Sigma Phase Embrittlement 32

33 885°F Embrittlement 33

34 Softening (Spheroidization) 34

35 Reheat Cracking 35

36 Sulfuric Acid Corrosion 36




of 52


37 Hydrofluoric Acid Corrosion 37

38 Flue Gas Dew Point Corrosion 38

39 Dissimilar Metal Weld (DMW) Cracking 39

40 Hydrogen Induced Cracking in HF 40

41 Dealloying 41

42 CO2 Corrosion 42

43 Corrosion Fatigue 43

44 Fuel Ash Corrosion 44

45 Amine Corrosion 45

46 Corrosion under Insulation (CUI) 46

47 Atmospheric corrosion 47

48 Ammonia Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) 48

49 Cooling Water Corrosion 49

50 Boiler Water/Condensate Corrosion 50

51 Microbiologically Induced Corrosion (MIC) 51

52 Liquid Metal Embrittlement 52

53 Galvanic Corrosion 53

54 Mechanical Fatigue 54

55 Nitriding 55

56 Vibration Induced Fatigue 56

57 Titanium Hydriding 57

58 Soil Corrosion 58

59 Metal Dusting 59

60 Strain Aging 60

61 Sulfate Stress Corrosion Cracking 61

62 Phosphoric Corrosion 62

63 Phenol (carbolic acid) Corrosion 63

64 Ethanol Stress Corrosion Cracking 64

65 Oxygen-enhanced Ignition and Combustion 65

66 Organic Acid Corrosion of Distilled Tower Overhead System 66

67 General Corrosion NA

68 Pitting Corrosion NA

69 Crevice Corrosion NA

70 Sweet Corrosion NA

71 Weight Loss Sour Corrosion NA

72 Acid Corrosion (Acidization) NA

73 Oxygen Corrosion NA

74 Elastomer Failure NA




of 52


75 Heat Checking NA

76 Thread Failure (Mech. F) NA

77 Tensile Overload (Mech. F) NA

78 Collapse (Mech. F) NA

79 Top of the line Corrosion NA

80 Under-deposit Corrosion NA

81 Acid Condensate Corrosion NA

82 Elemental Sulfur Corrosion NA

83 Casing Wear NA

84 Fretting Corrosion NA

85 Overlay Disbonding NA

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

SABP-A-033 Materials & Corrosion Control Standards

Documents

Transcript of SABP-A-033 Materials & Corrosion Control Standards